Subject: Re: comfort ye, my peepul
From: Jim Rovira (jrovira@drew.edu)
Date: Tue Feb 12 2002 - 10:17:39 GMT
yeah, I think we are pretty close to agreement :) (btw., I have Paul Friere
on my shelf, but I don't know if I have that particular essay...I'll
check). Sounds like you're keeping the "Rules of grammar" as a means to an
end and not an end in itself. . .it's hard to argue with that.
Don't even want to :).
Jim
Will Hochman wrote:
>
> Jim, if you noted some of the url's I posted earlier in this
> discussion, you might guess that I spend quite a bit of time teaching
> standard English. I think we are actually close to agreement. I think
> learning how to write standard English is important...it's just not
> the big kahuna for me. I don't think students learn how to care about
> rules of language until they care about making meaning, and I know
> from closely observing students' composing processes that fear of
> rules doesn't motivate learners. I just spent close to 40 hours
> responding to student essays and challenging students to learn about
> sentence structure, using the MLA, and specifying with details, so
> please know I work hard on the front lines of college literacy
> struggles. So let's get real. I think you know as well I do that
> teachers can use power poorly. I see it all the time. Sniping about
> grammar and punctuation when a student is saying something important
> isn't always wise. I do find opportunities to instruct students about
> proper English and I create class activities to show students how to
> teach themselves to use a handbook and to use their own critical
> thinking to improve language use. But I often see learning "scars"
> like students just trying to do what the teacher wants, or believing
> that correctness is intelligence. Like you, I know I'm teaching a
> dialect called standard English, but I also respect other dialects
> and don't think that rejecting them helps college students learn to
> write. Peter Elbow, a writing teacher whose scholarship I've found
> instructive talked about dialects and "mother tongues" as part of a
> composing process at last year's College Conference on Composition
> and Communication. It makes sense to me to respect the languages and
> ideas of my students. When we "enforce" standard English, we tend to
> lose sight of that respect. Rereading Foucault may not work...how
> about reading Paulo Freire instead? I'll be happy to send you a xerox
> of his essay "'The Banking' Concept of Education" which I'm teaching
> today. And since you mention Foucault, I'm guessing you might know
> about the Whorf-Sapir hypothesis...that language is connected to the
> realities of cultures...if we are teaching standard English and not
> listening closely to ideas that are not expressed in our academic
> dialect, we may be missing out on opportunities for students to teach
> teachers about our culture. You are right to nail me on too much
> polarization in my rhetoric, but I'm not letting go of this argument.
> We both agree knowing and using rules of English makes sense and it's
> part of much of my teaching effort, but I don't think careful grammar
> and punctuation happen without caring about ideas and meaning.
> Teaching students to care about their ideas and to strengthen them is
> a large job--following rules is part of it, but not my focus. will
> --
> Will Hochman
>
> Assistant Professor of English
> Southern Connecticut State University
> 501 Crescent St, New Haven, CT 06515
> 203 392 5024
>
> http://www.southernct.edu/~hochman/willz.html
>
> -
> * Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
> * UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Mar 20 2002 - 09:44:24 GMT