Knowing Your Approach as Teacher
The first part of Language Network provides a fabulous resource for the foundations of the English language; however, because it advocates knowledge of conventions for Standard American English, teachers need to be cautious about how they deliver the lessons.
According to Richard Fulkerson in his article, "The Four Philosophies of Composition," teachers need to reduce what he coins as "modal confusion" which is "a consistent mindlessness about relating means to desired ends" (430). Fulkerson argues that many educators across the nation do not know which philosophy or practice of composition they believe in and/or see as effective and efficient ways of teaching writing. As a result, teachers create a disconnect between what they believe, what they ask for, and what they assess students on in their writing. For example, if a teacher assigned an informal piece of writing, but decided to grade according to grammatical conventions, sentence structure, page length, etc. they're really not assessing according to what they assigned.
Fulkerson implores educators to adopt a consistent theory that shapes their pedagogy. In doing so, he offers four different philosophies of compositional pedagogies. One of these pertaining to the "formalist." Fulkerson describes the formalist or "current-traditionalist" as someone who regards writing in a very prescriptive manner.
In addition, in Joseph Harris' essay, "The Idea of Community in the Study of Writing," he states "students should [not] necessarily be working towards the mastery of some particular, well-defined sort of discourse. It seems to me that they might better be encouraged towards a kind of polyphony--an awareness of an pleasure in the various competing discourses that make up their own" (754). Harris suggests that rather than impose upon students the grammatical conventions of the public discourse, teachers should be helping students find their own discourses and what they experience day-in and day-out. In doing so, teachers are fostering an authentic means of writing and learning for the students that can further enrich their cognitive, communicative, and creative levels.
In relation to the first part of our text, the formalist pedagogy can very easily be kicked into play when delivering these lessons; however, it is critical to look back at Hillocks' research in teaching writing. Skill-and-Drill lessons and worksheets on these grammar lessons have been proven ineffective. Instead, teachers should focus the heart of these lessons on the "Write Away" activities. Covering each lesson through a formalist pedagogical method and practicing with the prescriptive areas of the text can be extremely ineffective and detrimental to student learning.
However, as prescriptive as this text can be in regards to language, it is very consistent and very structured. For beginning or first year teachers, this text might come into great use because of the setup, information (standard definitions, examples, and usages), and application to writing. It would be difficult for a first year teacher to stray away from the content of the text because it is so laid out. On the other hand, it is critical for educators to know their own compositional methodology when it comes to the English language and all its aspects of communication. If a teacher observes the prescriptive aspects of the text, he or she may find it useful to use the lesson as a skeleton, but the book also suggests that whomever is teaching is completely able to incorporate their own theories of how these lessons will best help students in the long run of reading, writing, and communicating.
According to Richard Fulkerson in his article, "The Four Philosophies of Composition," teachers need to reduce what he coins as "modal confusion" which is "a consistent mindlessness about relating means to desired ends" (430). Fulkerson argues that many educators across the nation do not know which philosophy or practice of composition they believe in and/or see as effective and efficient ways of teaching writing. As a result, teachers create a disconnect between what they believe, what they ask for, and what they assess students on in their writing. For example, if a teacher assigned an informal piece of writing, but decided to grade according to grammatical conventions, sentence structure, page length, etc. they're really not assessing according to what they assigned.
Fulkerson implores educators to adopt a consistent theory that shapes their pedagogy. In doing so, he offers four different philosophies of compositional pedagogies. One of these pertaining to the "formalist." Fulkerson describes the formalist or "current-traditionalist" as someone who regards writing in a very prescriptive manner.
In addition, in Joseph Harris' essay, "The Idea of Community in the Study of Writing," he states "students should [not] necessarily be working towards the mastery of some particular, well-defined sort of discourse. It seems to me that they might better be encouraged towards a kind of polyphony--an awareness of an pleasure in the various competing discourses that make up their own" (754). Harris suggests that rather than impose upon students the grammatical conventions of the public discourse, teachers should be helping students find their own discourses and what they experience day-in and day-out. In doing so, teachers are fostering an authentic means of writing and learning for the students that can further enrich their cognitive, communicative, and creative levels.
In relation to the first part of our text, the formalist pedagogy can very easily be kicked into play when delivering these lessons; however, it is critical to look back at Hillocks' research in teaching writing. Skill-and-Drill lessons and worksheets on these grammar lessons have been proven ineffective. Instead, teachers should focus the heart of these lessons on the "Write Away" activities. Covering each lesson through a formalist pedagogical method and practicing with the prescriptive areas of the text can be extremely ineffective and detrimental to student learning.
However, as prescriptive as this text can be in regards to language, it is very consistent and very structured. For beginning or first year teachers, this text might come into great use because of the setup, information (standard definitions, examples, and usages), and application to writing. It would be difficult for a first year teacher to stray away from the content of the text because it is so laid out. On the other hand, it is critical for educators to know their own compositional methodology when it comes to the English language and all its aspects of communication. If a teacher observes the prescriptive aspects of the text, he or she may find it useful to use the lesson as a skeleton, but the book also suggests that whomever is teaching is completely able to incorporate their own theories of how these lessons will best help students in the long run of reading, writing, and communicating.