Thanks to ideas
from Noden’s Image Grammar and
teaching styles I have recently observed by practicing teachers, I have less
fear of teaching grammar than I did at the beginning of the semester. For one thing, my experiences in the actual classroom
have lessened my fear of making grammatical mistakes simply because I have
found them in actual grammar textbooks.
I also believe that teaching grammar is palatable to students if the
teacher approaches it in a positive way and with a sense of humor. At West Perry Middle School this week, the
seventh grade grammar lesson was on compound nouns. The teacher taught the students what a
compound noun was according to the text, but was up front with the students
that she didn’t necessarily agree with the textbooks “rules.” For example, the textbook taught that
sleeping bag is a compound noun. Sleeping
is the present participle verb that acts as an adjective to modify bag, it is
not a noun! In the same way the text
taught that dining room is a compound noun.
My co-op teacher was upfront with the students that she will not test
them on some of these words, and that she didn’t agree with the text book. But what really stood out to me about this
lesson is the way in which a teacher can present grammar and make it
interesting to the students by demonstrating a healthy sense of humor about the
many grammar rules and various ways they can be broken, and by pointing out how
a grammar textbook doesn’t always get these rules right! We also found various parallel structure
errors in the exercises designed for illustrating compound nouns.
An English
teacher does need to point out errors in student papers and correct grammar,
but I feel that a teacher should not view themselves as the grammar police that
needs to correct everything. After
considering “The English Teacher’s Red Pen” and the positions of Gallagher, I
no longer think that I have to circle every error and correct them for the
student. The experience with Dr.
Mortimore-Smith’s wifys writer confirmed this for me. The in-class exercise of rewriting a small
portion of that paper was an eye-opener for me.
I found it extremely difficult to attempt to improve or “fix” the errors
of an unknown student. This reinforced
the value and importance of conferencing with students. I will make every effort to do this with high
school students, because I have seen it work really effectively at the college
level, and I have seen my tenth grade co-op teacher make it work even under
time constraints. Verbal conferencing
has value because it allows more feedback in a short amount of time than
writing all over a paper and in a verbal conference the student must respond in
some manner to the teacher, I believe an added bonus is that it makes the
student more accountable to the teacher.
Noden’s text and
our classroom lessons derived from it have been an enjoyable way to look at
grammar. No one in their right mind
could call our method’s class grammar lessons boringJ.
Tuesday was worth it just for all the humorous takes on action
verbs. On a serious note, I am looking
forward to trying some of Noden’s ideas in my own classroom. In light of finding errors in grammar
textbooks, I found it really interesting in Noden’s chapter six, how
accomplished authors have used special effects in punctuation and structure
that “break” grammar rules. Before I get
too strict with student grammar I may do well to remember that many of
them—that is my future students—will potentially far surpass me in writing
skills.
