Grammar--why teach it?

[garddwr]

OK friends, this is something I'm wrestling with: do we need to teach grammar? Why should we teach grammar?

 

I've been re-reading my entire stash of "classical education" books, and most of them emphasize grammar. Mostly the reason given is that intensive study/understanding of grammar is necessary to produce good writing. My personal experience has been that extensive, high quality reading is sufficient to gain an understanding of both grammar and style in writing. It's an organic process, or at least it has been for me.

 

Medieval education emphasized grammar--Latin grammar--because for hundreds of years Latin was the language of scholars, but it was a second language to all who learned it; so they learned by rules and paradigms rather than by absorption. Latin is also, of course, and inflected language, so understanding the parts of speech and the function of each word in a sentence was important--sill, native speakers would have picked up such distinctions naturally without needing to know the names of the different cases and conjugations.

 

So I ask--must we teach grammar? And must we teach it year after year? Could we not teach the basics of punctuation etc. as our children learn to write, then wait until sometime in the teen years to let them tackle the more abstract parsing of the language?

 

Thoughts?

[regentrude]

Exactly my thoughts. As a student, I never understood why I had to study grammar in my native language because I could use it correctly without knowing the formal rules - as would be the case with most people who speak and write well (which is also why a native speaker is not necessarily a good teacher of the language as a foreign language).

OTOH, for foreign language instruction grammar is a must.

 

We will do pretty much what you have suggested: the kids have some understanding of English grammar (noun, verb, adjective, subject, predicate, what is a sentence) acquired in elementary school.

The grammar instruction hereafter is in their OTHER languages - German and French. There it is absolutely necessary (particularly since German has declensions). We will, at some point during the high school years, do a crash course in English grammar so that they are familiar with all the terms.

 

I do not, however, believe that the study of formal grammar is necessary for good writing in ones native language - nor does it automatically improve writing if grammar is studied.

So, there, I said it. I guess that makes me a heretic on a classical education board.

[Peela]

I too picked up correct grammar from extensive good quality reading, however I don't believe everyone can or does.

Also..if everyone gave up studying grammar and left it to a few elite academics....we lose a valuable resource and knowledge that benefits us all in stopping our language degenerate to a pretty poor one.

 

It is possible to teach grammar using for example JAG and Analytical Grammar, in a couple of years, though.

 

Some people actually enjoy it, too :)

 

Another point i have seen here is that when you read something and it clangs- but you don't really know why, you just know it does- a good knowledge of grammar will tell you exactly why and help you correct it. Since learning grammar to the extent I have while homeschooling, i am amazed at the poor grammar all over the place- the run on sentences in particular, even in supposedly edited pieces of writing.

 

So..considering poor grammar is used widely....and a classical education is all about having a very high standard of education-learning the language of grammar helps us not only raise our own level of writing but also be able to understand why a piece of writing is written well. It is the tool of having another language, the language of the language behind language.

 

And no, I don't think it is necessary to know grammar to write well, but for the above reasons- and I am sure others will come up with plenty more- I think it is very valuable. Poor grammar abounds- and it is getting worse- therefore I think it is a worthy part of a good education.

[MorganClassicalPrep]

Well. After what I've seen in some of my peer's essays at the university level, DD will be studying grammar.

 

I don't have perfect grammar myself (especially not on message boards! :tongue_smilie:), but I can at least produce scholarly writing when necessary. Many people in my classes cannot. Instead of focusing on their ideas, evidence, and having a strong thesis, they instead have to focus on where to put the period, when to use commas, and even proper capitalization!

 

For this reason, I also think studying grammar while young is a good idea. That way, a child has a firm grounding in grammar rules before they are required to produce papers using those rules.

 

(Also- I see studying a foreign language as part of studying English grammar. My own grammar has become SO much better since I've studied other languages.)

[Parrothead]

... however I don't believe everyone can or does.

 

:iagree: I know entirely too many people who butcher the language when they speak.

[cathmom]

Exactly my thoughts. As a student, I never understood why I had to study grammar in my native language because I could use it correctly without knowing the formal rules - as would be the case with most people who speak and write well (which is also why a native speaker is not necessarily a good teacher of the language as a foreign language).

OTOH, for foreign language instruction grammar is a must.

 

 

 

 

I strongly believe that a native speaker is usually not a good beginning teacher of a foreign language because they have not had to learn it as the students are doing. For this reason I would not want to teach beginning English!

 

Understanding grammar makes learning a foreign language SO MUCH EASIER.

[Rosie_0801]

Understanding grammar makes learning a foreign language SO MUCH EASIER.

 

Yup. That's why I'm learning it. That and I feel like an idiot for not knowing it. For quite a while there, I knew more Auslan grammar than English. I figure I'll need to keep the kids' knowledge of English grammar a bit further a head of their grammar instruction in subsequent languages. Not that I know; I just assume that's how it needs to work based on my experiences.

 

Rosie

Edited June 7, 2011 by Rosie_0801

[ELaurie]

until I studied Koine Greek in college. It would have made foreign language studies easier if I had learned the rules of grammar in my native tongue.

[Daisy Mommy]

I am making my kids take grammar so they don't turn out like Eliza Doolittle from my fair lady...

 

Also because I love to read and write (intelligently) and I want to pass that on to my children.

 

Plus it will make it easier for them to learn other languages, and help them get better grades in collage (hopefully)...

[JessieC]

Absolutely. I agree with you. There is no connection between teaching grammar and strong writing skills. Studies show this consistently. I can quote you a ton of them. Writing, like speaking, is an organic process. I think teaching mechanics, parts of speech, etc. is more useful when there is already a firm mastery of writing--I think at that point students are more receptive to thinking about language in that way.

 

Honestly, when I see really intense grammar instruction used as a way to teach students to write, I imagine systematically teaching a baby phonemes and vocabulary to help it learn to speak. This would only have a detrimental impact on their developing speech.

[ktgrok]

Absolutely. I agree with you. There is no connection between teaching grammar and strong writing skills. Studies show this consistently. I can quote you a ton of them. Writing, like speaking, is an organic process. I think teaching mechanics, parts of speech, etc. is more useful when there is already a firm mastery of writing--I think at that point students are more receptive to thinking about language in that way.

 

Honestly, when I see really intense grammar instruction used as a way to teach students to write, I imagine systematically teaching a baby phonemes and vocabulary to help it learn to speak. This would only have a detrimental impact on their developing speech.

 

Hmm....but we write much more formally than we speak. We often speak in run on sentences, fragments, etc.

[LizzyBee]

Absolutely. I agree with you. There is no connection between teaching grammar and strong writing skills. Studies show this consistently. I can quote you a ton of them. Writing, like speaking, is an organic process. I think teaching mechanics, parts of speech, etc. is more useful when there is already a firm mastery of writing--I think at that point students are more receptive to thinking about language in that way.

 

Honestly, when I see really intense grammar instruction used as a way to teach students to write, I imagine systematically teaching a baby phonemes and vocabulary to help it learn to speak. This would only have a detrimental impact on their developing speech.

 

I've read that there is no connection between teaching grammar out of context and good writing. In other words, grammar should be taught, but the student should have opportunities to apply it immediately as it is being taught.

[WishboneDawn]

 

I've been re-reading my entire stash of "classical education" books, and most of them emphasize grammar. Mostly the reason given is that intensive study/understanding of grammar is necessary to produce good writing. My personal experience has been that extensive, high quality reading is sufficient to gain an understanding of both grammar and style in writing. It's an organic process, or at least it has been for me.

 

This was my thinking until I realized there was a parallel between grammar and my drawing.

 

I've drawn since forever. I'm very good at it. I can draw something a cartoonish scene with a good sense of perspective and sit and sketch a live scene and have it look very good.

 

But I have huge gaps in my knowledge when it comes to understanding things that go on beneath the drawing, like how lines of perspective radiate from a point on the horizon and how to build a scene from those lines up.

 

I know what looks right but I don't grasp the why of it and so I'm limited in what I can do. It's very similar to how I feel about grammar. To truly go as far as you should be able to with writing you've not only got to have a good sense for what's right but also a firm grasp of why it's right.

 

Nevermind that grammar is fun and beautiful and completely engaging with the right program and that after you've started to pull back the curtain you realize you their's no going back. :)

 

That said I don't think much of teaching a child grammar year after year. I plan on delaying it with my son other then some occasional mentions of parts of speech. I think that for an older student a year or two with an excellent program is probably fine

Edited June 7, 2011 by WishboneDawn

[LizzyBee]

Hmm....but we write much more formally than we speak. We often speak in run on sentences, fragments, etc.

 

Exactly. And many young people write that way, too.

[sewpeaceful]

In SWB's talk on teachiing writing to elementary students (downloadable for $3.99 at PHP), she explains the benefits of teaching grammar. Basically, when a student writes a sentence and it is unclear or akward, you can have the student diagram the sentence and realize what is wrong. Strong grammar skills, a strong understanding of how a sentence should be contructed correctly, enables us to teach our students to be stronger writers and more effectively express themselves, particularly during the rhetoric years.

 

Many of us chose a classical education because we want our kids to receive the education we never received, to ensure they receive an education superior to our local public school systems where grammar is ignored (not all systems ignore it so let's just let me point out many do). If we want our kids to have this education, then let's make sure they have the foundation necessary to produce that education.

[simka2]

My parents believed as you do. I suffer for it. I have read extensivly, but I still cannot put together a nice essay (or post for that manner). I am getting better as I go thru things with my children. I can right a complete 4th grade level sentence and not worry too much.

 

Reading is not a substitute for a thorough grammar education. Can some get by without it, possibly, but I have anger issues towards my parents and PS for the deplorable grammar education I recieved.

 

Reading is a substitue for vocabulary, not grammar.

[dangermom]

I recently read a book titled The War on Grammar. My review is at the link, including why I think grammar instruction is important.

 

Yes, if you're a strong reader, you can probably pick up most of the rules of grammar. But you won't know why they work, and you'll be missing a bunch of them and making mistakes too. (And what if you're not a strong reader? It's not like Americans are great at that.) I wish I had been taught more grammar. But read my link; that's more coherent. :)

[Hikin' Mama]

my 16 yos, whom I homeschooled through 8th grade, told me that the grammar and sentence diagramming that we did has helped him with Spanish. He's taken two years of Spanish in high school. (It's big for him to admit this, because he didn't really enjoy grammar, to put it mildly. He's more a math and science guy.)

 

Also, this is not necessarily grammar, but the outlining we did served him well. Last year, he had to do an outline in English class, and he did an actual outline. Many of the kids wrote down a sentence or two :confused:, and his teacher's comment to him was, "Wow, you really went all out." No, he just did an outline as he had learned to do them.

[JessieC]

Hmm....but we write much more formally than we speak. We often speak in run on sentences, fragments, etc.

 

This is an analogy--of course writing and speech are almost different languages. My point is that you learn to write through immersion in the written word, and not through memorizing grammar rules, just as you learn speech through immersion in oral language.

 

I do agree that an understanding of grammar and standard conventions is helpful, especially after you are writing somewhat proficiently--still, language is so organic and big and complex, most of the time we don't know what we are doing linguistically. (I wrote the previous sentence and feel confident in its clarity, but don't ask me to diagram it!)

[Mrs Mungo]

:iagree: I know entirely too many people who butcher the language when they speak.

 

Writing is even worse. My sig line has only mildly affected apostrophe abuse on this forum. ;)

 

 

Can you play an instrument without learning to read music? Yes, you can even be wildly successful. Paul McCartney never learned to read music. Is that the norm? No. Most people are better off learning to read music. I see grammar the same way.

[Satori]

Thanks for the suggestion of The War Against Grammar book, ordering it now.

 

I figured we'd start grammar with First Language Lessons in first grade, but I had no clue how much my daughter and I would love grammar. It's giving her the tools to express herself at such a young age. I'm amazed at how helpful studying grammar has been in her studies. I look forward to brushing up myself and improving my own writing.

 

- Coming from the family who now uses 4 grammar programs

[Capt_Uhura]

I'll probably butcher this so I'll have Kalmia further elaborate but a college friend of hers has been chatting w/ her about grammar. He is now of the thinking that students need grammar to have a common vocabulary for discussing their writing. It's hard to discuss good sentence structure, varied sentence structure, why a sentence moves us in literature w/out having a common vocabulary.

 

My Aunt's DD got marked down for subject-verb disagreement. Her DD is a rising 7th grader. She had no idea what subject-verb disagreement meant or much idea about parts of speech. She's in a well to do school in a well to do neighborhood. How can you discuss these things w/out a grammar foundation?

[EKS]

I think being a native speaker of standard English is a wonderful foundation upon which writing skills are developed. However, at a minimum, grammar instruction gives the teacher and student a common language they can use to discuss the details of writing, including mechanics.

[Sputterduck]

This is an analogy--of course writing and speech are almost different languages. My point is that you learn to write through immersion in the written word, and not through memorizing grammar rules, just as you learn speech through immersion in oral language.

 

I do agree that an understanding of grammar and standard conventions is helpful, especially after you are writing somewhat proficiently--still, language is so organic and big and complex, most of the time we don't know what we are doing linguistically. (I wrote the previous sentence and feel confident in its clarity, but don't ask me to diagram it!)

 

Well, we do if we learn the basic foundations of our language... like grammar.

Edited June 7, 2011 by Sputterduck

[Veritaserum]

In SWB's talk on teachiing writing to elementary students (downloadable for $3.99 at PHP), she explains the benefits of teaching grammar. Basically, when a student writes a sentence and it is unclear or akward, you can have the student diagram the sentence and realize what is wrong. Strong grammar skills, a strong understanding of how a sentence should be contructed correctly, enables us to teach our students to be stronger writers and more effectively express themselves, particularly during the rhetoric years.

 

Many of us chose a classical education because we want our kids to receive the education we never received, to ensure they receive an education superior to our local public school systems where grammar is ignored (not all systems ignore it so let's just let me point out many do). If we want our kids to have this education, then let's make sure they have the foundation necessary to produce that education.

:iagree: Written language is artificial. It needs to be taught explicitly and grammar instruction is integral to that. Reading and speaking are also important, but they do not provide the same level of understanding as the explicit study of grammar. TWTM expresses the idea that you need to read quality literature, speak properly, and study grammar.

 

I am also a fan of explicit phonics instruction.

[elise1mds]

I am teaching grammar for two reasons:

 

1) My son wants to be a published scientist. I realize they have editors at those journals, but I suspect it would be easier to hand in a coherent work than try to ask someone else to correctly rework a sentence containing a dangling participle. DS also wants to learn various languages, and obviously he'll need grammar to master them.

 

2) Whenever my husband writes reports for work, he asks me to edit them. This evening I was flipping through the writing book my son has asked to work through this summer, and my husband could not identify a sentence fragment or define a compound sentence. He knows his shortcomings and has asked if I will (gently) work with him this summer as well. If that's not a hard sell for grammar, I don't know what is!

[Kalmia]

Capt. Uhura mentioned the long writing discussions I've been having with an old high school buddy turned college professor. Here is some of what he had to say on grammar and writing:

 

 

"I do teach undergraduate students, and I do teach them writing, so I hope this helps.

 

 

I guess the key (and probably depressing) thing has to do with grammar. There are basically two types of professor views on grammar. The first (and I think largest) group believes that grammar and writing free of "surface errors" is the most important part of writing. The second type thinks that grammar issues are secondary, and that what is important is to find one's own voice, write expressively, and communicate clearly. The issue is that NEITHER of this groups either wants to or does teach grammar to undergraduate students. So if students don't learn the proper use of commas, correct spelling, etc. before coming to college, they are unlikely to do so at all. This will annoy professor group #1 to no end, leading them to assault their papers with red ink and mutter about "kids today," and it will be studiously smiled at and ignored by group #2. I remember reading once back in the day in some childhood development book that kids from I guess 4th grade into middle school are really wired well for memorization but have a harder time with "higher order" thinking. Memorizing grammar and spelling at this age is probably a good use of time.

 

 

I'm somewhat between these two groups. I think that it's really important for students to know how to recognize and fix their own surface errors, but I think that they need to learn other "higher order" stuff too. Like my colleagues, however, I don't really have (or more accurately take) the time to work one on one in grammar tutorials, so I try to let them know that the issue is important and give them some fixing strategies.

 

 

Many of my students actually have learned these basic strategies for avoiding surface errors, and with them I find myself working on a set of core writing principles that I think are totally learnable by high school students too:

 

 

1) subjects and verbs are the heart of the sentence

2) beware the passive voice - it not only robs vitality from the prose, but for historians it often indicates a failure of research as well as of style (i.e. "mistakes were made.")

3) each sentence should express a single thought - if you have more thoughts, use more sentences

4) don't write defensively (I guess more properly this would be "write offensively," but that comes off wrong)

5) read a lot and mimic the writing that you like

 

 

As you can tell, much of this is actually trying to undo what they had been taught at some earlier level. Teachers who instructed them never to use "I" in an essay trained many of them to write passively, even squishily. As a result, many struggle with clarity in their arguments. They also get lost in all kinds of little phrases and clauses in their sentences and forget to foreground their main subjects and verbs. For all the mockery it got from writing teachers, I swear to God that diagramming sentences was really helpful for me whenever it was I was made to do it. "

[Colleen in NS]

...students need grammar to have a common vocabulary for discussing their writing. It's hard to discuss good sentence structure, varied sentence structure, why a sentence moves us in literature w/out having a common vocabulary.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

And in addition to all the great reasons for studying grammar given in this thread, I am also finding that grammar study has helped my kids to become clearer thinkers. Just today my dd was trying to put together a four-sentence narration. She would say her thoughts, and try to make a sentence out of them, and not always get the grammar correct. So I'd say the sentence to her in a grammatically correct way and ask, "Now, is that what you meant to say?" "Yes!" And so she'd repeat it grammatically correctly and then write it down. Knowing grammar can help you to say things clearly. Or even to read things and figure out if they are clear or not.

 

Oh, and I also strongly agree that just because a person might absorb grammar through reading, and be naturally good at writing grammatically correctly, does not mean that he/she knows how to teach grammar to someone else (a child, perhaps) who might not absorb it naturally. I wouldn't push my luck with that. Just like I wouldn't push my luck with waiting to teach reading until a child asks to learn - what if he never asks?? There's a lot more to learning to read than just learning sight words.

Edited June 7, 2011 by Colleen in NS

[Heather in WI]

My personal experience has been that extensive, high quality reading is sufficient to gain an understanding of both grammar and style in writing. It's an organic process, or at least it has been for me.

 

 

 

My personal experience is just the opposite. I've read extensive, high quality literature since I was a teen and I can't write worth a hoot! :lol:

 

I even was in the honors program in college and graduated college magna cum laude and still feel self-conscious about my grammar and writing.

 

I've learned so much teaching my own sons grammar. I'm glad that they're getting the foundation I never received.

[cat]

I haven't taught any grammar and ds took the IOWA Basic Skills Test... and scored really high in LA area. He's in middle school...... so I think I will teach grammar when we hit high school just so he has it.

[Haiku]

My personal experience has been that extensive, high quality reading is sufficient to gain an understanding of both grammar and style in writing. It's an organic process, or at least it has been for me.

 

 

 

I find this to be untrue, for the most part. I was an editor in my pre-kid life, and I have to say that most people who thought that they were very good writers definitely could have benefited from a grammar course or two. Vernacular English is rife with colloquialisms that are grammatically incorrect. They sound fine in speech but not fine in academic writing. Reproducing what we read and hear often means reproducing errors.

 

Tara

[dangermom]

 

2) Whenever my husband writes reports for work, he asks me to edit them. This evening I was flipping through the writing book my son has asked to work through this summer, and my husband could not identify a sentence fragment or define a compound sentence. He knows his shortcomings and has asked if I will (gently) work with him this summer as well. If that's not a hard sell for grammar, I don't know what is!

This is so common! I have a good friend who went to a private girls' prep school, and got an amazing education. Her husband grew up poor in a rural area and got a fairly poor education, but both went to the same college, which is where I met them. Husband is in the same boat; he is a business guy who has to have his wife edit his business letters, because he knows he's making mistakes but can't spot them. He and I have often commiserated on our bad K-12 educations; we both feel kind of cheated.

 

Not knowing how to talk about grammar--the basic terms--leads to difficulty in writing. Those are your tools, you should know them.

[mhgillil]

I have never been taught how to build a house. I know what a house looks like and I know what materials are needed to construct one, but I sure as heck would not want to live in a house I built myself.

[Sputterduck]

I have never been taught how to build a house. I know what a house looks like and I know what materials are needed to construct one, but I sure as heck would not want to live in a house I built myself.

 

Does that parallel with you recognize good writing but you aren't comfortable with writing yourself?

[Alenee]

I think being a native speaker of standard English is a wonderful foundation upon which writing skills are developed. However, at a minimum, grammar instruction gives the teacher and student a common language they can use to discuss the details of writing, including mechanics.

 

:iagree: Not to mention, our society's verbal skills have dropped to unfathomable lows. There was an article I heard about years ago that talked about getting kids reading because if they were reading only, they wouldn't be out DOING. We need to equip our children to get out and make a difference, rather than sitting on their duffs waiting to have everything done for them. One of the basics of a great education begins with the grammar of our language. :rant:

[mhgillil]

Does that parallel with you recognize good writing but you aren't comfortable with writing yourself?

 

For me personally, no. When I need to write, I am completely confident in my ability to do so and to do it well.

 

Understanding the rules of grammar and being a good writer do not necessarily go hand-in-hand. I was homeschooled and my mother greatly emphasized the importance of grammar in my education, but I have never been much of a writer. My narrative voice tends towards the dry and academic, which the majority of people do not find engaging.

[nmoira]

Disregard. I read subsequent posts and obviously misunderstood the poster in question. :)

Edited June 7, 2011 by nmoira

[leeannpal]

Absolutely. I agree with you. There is no connection between teaching grammar and strong writing skills. Studies show this consistently. I can quote you a ton of them. Writing, like speaking, is an organic process. I think teaching mechanics, parts of speech, etc. is more useful when there is already a firm mastery of writing--I think at that point students are more receptive to thinking about language in that way.

 

Honestly, when I see really intense grammar instruction used as a way to teach students to write, I imagine systematically teaching a baby phonemes and vocabulary to help it learn to speak. This would only have a detrimental impact on their developing speech.

 

So, how do you teach students to write correctly?

[leeannpal]

I haven't taught any grammar and ds took the IOWA Basic Skills Test... and scored really high in LA area. He's in middle school...... so I think I will teach grammar when we hit high school just so he has it.

 

But can he write coherent paragraphs, essays or even emails?

[Laura Corin]

I think that many students can absorb a lot from good reading. Both my boys knew how to use colons and semicolons before I had explicitly taught them, just because they had seen them used so much. I do think that a grammar survey at some point is useful, however, to tidy up understanding; it doesn't have to be every year, however.

 

Laura

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

To me, grammar instruction helps makes sense of why certain ways of expression are considered correct and others are not. It also does provide that common vocabulary that previous posters have mentioned. It would have been extremely helpful to me as a French instructor at a state university if any of my students had known any of the parts of speech.

 

When I learned to diagram sentences in 7th grade, a whole world of understanding about how words connect and relate to each other was opened up for me. Grammar instruction certainly helped me become a better writer, even though I had always been an avid reader and had experienced good writing in books.

[Sahamamama]

In a classical education, we teach grammar for understanding. In the beginning, grammar instruction might be no more than a rote memory exercise (e.g., "A noun is the name of a person, place, thing, or idea"). This is sufficient for, and appropriate, to the level of the student. But as we move on from the primary years, grammar instruction ought to lead to a deeper understanding of language -- not merely one particular language, but the whole of spoken and written human language.

 

I remember how, years ago, I stood in the chapel of the Cloisters. All around me were Latin inscriptions -- which I could not read. :glare: I remember (distinctly) feeling shut out of my own culture, of my own Western-European-Christian heritage. It was disorienting. It provoked me to disdain my own supposedly rigorous education. And there was a sense of loss, and the dawning of the realization that at some time these inscriptions had been comprehensible to "educated" people, but here I, as an honors English student on a senior class trip, was unable to decipher more than the most rudimentary sense of the Latin inscriptions.

 

I remember standing there, doing my best to construe the meaning, while all my classmates simply moved on. My teacher noticed that I was attempting to work out the Latin. He nodded his head sadly, and remarked that if I had been born a few decades earlier, I would have had the opportunity to learn Latin. He had been teaching long enough to remember when Latin had been dropped (completely) from the high school curriculum. When I was in school, it was not even an elective. Together, with his rusty Latin and my enthusiasm, we worked out the basic meaning of the inscriptions, but I left there that day with the conviction that my "honors" classes -- we were always told how we were the "top" and how our education was "on a college level" -- was not as meaningful or wonderful or ____________? as I had been lead to believe.

 

I later learned about classical education, and now know that "classical" was the missing concept from that day of epiphany. The NEA -- National Experimental Association -- had dissected Education to the point of eviscerating and killing her. But we had our "top" students, didn't we? I know, I was considered one of them. But I had no keys to understanding, so entire fields of inquiry were shut to me.

 

Not to sound too highbrow here, ;) but we learn grammar simply because it is part of the classical cannon. The utilitarian virtues -- writing a better sentence, being able to diagram a blunder -- are useful outcomes of the study, but are not the reason for the study. We are currently too blind, too in a stupor of ignorance to make our own clear-sighted, clear-headed decisions about which mountains to climb. When we are out of the Valley of Mediocrity, we will see the wisdom of the path on which grammar leads us.

 

Many on this thread have voiced that angst of our own painful, personal experiences with not knowing, not understanding. And we have voiced the conviction that Classical Education knows a better way. The classical educator is brought through these experiences to a point of being able to say, "I trust my guide. Her name is Classical Education, and she will lead me well as we climb Parnassus."

[cathmom]

Since I have several children with various learning issues, I am no longer of the mind that they will "just pick (xyz) up." Yes, some children do. But if you rely on that, you leave behind the dc who don't. I'm no longer willing to do that.

 

However, I am working on a different approach to grammar than repetition and memorization. I'll let you know how it goes! :001_smile:

[MeaganS]

In a classical education, we teach grammar for understanding. In the beginning, grammar instruction might be no more than a rote memory exercise (e.g., "A noun is the name of a person, place, thing, or idea"). This is sufficient for, and appropriate, to the level of the student. But as we move on from the primary years, grammar instruction ought to lead to a deeper understanding of language -- not merely one particular language, but the whole of spoken and written human language.

 

I remember how, years ago, I stood in the chapel of the Cloisters. All around me were Latin inscriptions -- which I could not read. :glare: I remember (distinctly) feeling shut out of my own culture, of my own Western-European-Christian heritage. It was disorienting. It provoked me to disdain my own supposedly rigorous education. And there was a sense of loss, and the dawning of the realization that at some time these inscriptions had been comprehensible to "educated" people, but here I, as an honors English student on a senior class trip, was unable to decipher more than the most rudimentary sense of the Latin inscriptions.

 

I remember standing there, doing my best to construe the meaning, while all my classmates simply moved on. My teacher noticed that I was attempting to work out the Latin. He nodded his head sadly, and remarked that if I had been born a few decades earlier, I would have had the opportunity to learn Latin. He had been teaching long enough to remember when Latin had been dropped (completely) from the high school curriculum. When I was in school, it was not even an elective. Together, with his rusty Latin and my enthusiasm, we worked out the basic meaning of the inscriptions, but I left there that day with the conviction that my "honors" classes -- we were always told how we were the "top" and how our education was "on a college level" -- was not as meaningful or wonderful or ____________? as I had been lead to believe.

 

I later learned about classical education, and now know that "classical" was the missing concept from that day of epiphany. The NEA -- National Experimental Association -- had dissected Education to the point of eviscerating and killing her. But we had our "top" students, didn't we? I know, I was considered one of them. But I had no keys to understanding, so entire fields of inquiry were shut to me.

 

Not to sound too highbrow here, ;) but we learn grammar simply because it is part of the classical cannon. The utilitarian virtues -- writing a better sentence, being able to diagram a blunder -- are useful outcomes of the study, but are not the reason for the study. We are currently too blind, too in a stupor of ignorance to make our own clear-sighted, clear-headed decisions about which mountains to climb. When we are out of the Valley of Mediocrity, we will see the wisdom of the path on which grammar leads us.

 

Many on this thread have voiced that angst of our own painful, personal experiences with not knowing, not understanding. And we have voiced the conviction that Classical Education knows a better way. The classical educator is brought through these experiences to a point of being able to say, "I trust my guide. Her name is Classical Education, and she will lead me well as we climb Parnassus."

 

I had some very epic-sounding music playing in the background while I read this. I think it was the soundtrack from Gladiator? Anyways, I loved what you had to say and it sounded especially inspiring with the grand music. I imagined you giving us a peptalk as we're on the mountain, like Sam and Frodo. "...but I can carry you!":001_smile:

[Sahamamama]

I had some very epic-sounding music playing in the background while I read this. I think it was the soundtrack from Gladiator? Anyways, I loved what you had to say and it sounded especially inspiring with the grand music. I imagined you giving us a peptalk as we're on the mountain, like Sam and Frodo. "...but I can carry you!":001_smile:

 

:lol::lol: Hilarious! So glad we can crack each other up this morning. I almost didn't post it, because I thought, "Good grief, Beth." :tongue_smilie: But, yes, we need to climb if we're going to see the view. Have a good one, and thanks for the laugh.

 

[Off to re-read my post with the theme music from Gladiator playing in the background....]

[lllll]

...

Edited December 19, 2012 by ksva

[kalanamak]

 

Thoughts?

 

 

This is a favorite topic, and you might try searching the K-8 board. I teach my son grammar for 3 reasons:

 

1) so that he and I have a lexicon to discuss his writing (and the writing of others) when he is older and his writing is more complex.

2) to make an on-ramp into learning other languages. No fun having to learn grammar and another language at the same time

3) He does not have the exposure to very perfect speech I did. I had two articulate parents, both born before 1920 and well-schooled. I had a pack of older sibs who also spoke correctly. My son has me after work, a daddy who grew up on the wrong side of the tracks, and an ambient culture full of horrid language use. He may grow up to be a carpenter, or a med-surg nurse in rural America, but who knows. I would not have his language skills hold him back from whatever he tries to shoot for.

[angela in ohio]

My personal experience has been that extensive, high quality reading is sufficient to gain an understanding of both grammar and style in writing. It's an organic process, or at least it has been for me.

 

It might have been for you. It is true for some people, a very, very few lucky people who can internalize a system just through exposure. And you could pray that all four of your dc learn in exactly the same way as you, but that's not likely. It's not even likely any of them will learn in exactly the same way as each other. :D After my dc started getting older, and I could see that they weren't all going to be exactly like me (which is wrong, I tell you!! :glare:,) I realized that "what worked for me" wasn't the best way to make educational choices. :001_smile:

 

And to grammar specifically... the stakes are just too high to risk it. THE most important aspect of a person in their educational and professional career is how they speak and write.

[wapiti]

At some point, in some professions, communication comes down to hair-splitting and requires a great deal of precision. Having a thorough understanding of grammar goes a long way toward helping one to communicate with precision. It's one thing to be able to write a college paper; it's quite another to write a technical manual or a legal brief. (How do we even know what our laws mean? talk about splitting hairs!)

 

Some students, especially those who struggle with implied meanings, really need explicit, direct instruction in grammar. Reading and writing are only part of the equation.

 

I once knew a person with a small business who sent out email advertisements and wrote press releases rife with errors. DS8 even found a grammatically questionable sentence on a fast food container - people write stuff that should embarrass them and they don't even know it.

[LibraryLover]

seems, and one helps with the other and on down the line it goes. :)

 

 

ETA: Warning. Adding a shameless brag here .......... she got an 800 on the Critical Reading section of the SAT. (You all are the first ones I've told - and the few who might understand how excited we were - about a 'number.' lol)

 

 

My oldest did as well. I know it was partly because of his years of Latin. Of course, my younger son had the same years, and the same instructor...and I don't think we will see an 800 from him. lol Pesky sibling differeneces. Where are those clones I ordered. :tongue_smilie: Well see. I'll be happy with 600.

Edited June 8, 2011 by LibraryLover