Grammar to Enrich

Okay everyone I am still not sure if I get the hang of this whole blog thing, however I think I am starting to like this for class.

Chapter one was a really brief introductory chapter about the purpose of the entire book.  Which, in my opinion, can be found in the title.  Weaver argues, despite previous and/or popular belief, isolating the teaching grammar or centralizing a classroom around the idea of grammar does a student no help turning to the application of grammar to writing.  Instead Weaver suggests educators should shift their perspective to teaching effective grammar skills to help enhance their students writing.  Thus resulting in more clear, coherent, well defined syntax in writing.  My inference from her statement is that grammar should be used as another tool to develop one's own writing skills.  In a way I agree.  At the end of the chapter Weaver lists observations made about grammar and the teaching of it.  In one point she explains that few students will transfer and isolated grammar lesson to their writing.  I especially agreed with this statement because it had applied to me.  When I wrote I never looked at grammar as a tool.  Grammar was a ball and chain pulling down my freedom and eventually my grade. 

Chapter 2 is started after my Yoda Pez dispenser tells me "Pez for you I have" and I cannot help but think speech would be so much easier to understand if we spoke exactly as Yoda.  Actually I do not know if that is true but it still would be cool.  There are two major points that I acquired after reading chapter two.  The first being the already iterated statement:  The old manor of traditional grammar instruction does not increase a child's understanding of grammar.  Only this time they sight sources.  One interesting point they do make is off of a study done where the research was conclusive that the isolated teaching of grammar was bad however the research did not reveal a good alternative.   

The second point I found interesting in chapter two was the entire attitude Weaver seemed to be taking with grammar.  They idea of "correct" and "error" were not the ideal way to introduce, or assess whether a student has obtained good skills in grammar (- if that statement is even proper I do not know).  Instead Weaver proposes that we introduce grammar as a trial and error.  as a means to reach a better finished project or paper.


Concluding chapter 2 with a firm statement of change Weave moves to chapter 3 where positive, productive and practical are emphasized... yet again.  In competely honesty I am ten pages away from the end of the reading now and I am really absorbing no different information than I have gained in the previous two chapters.  Nothing with methods or application.  All theories on what is not the best way to teach grammar and how grammar should be taught in connection with reading and writing.

Weaver talks about her point being that students already know a lot of the traditional rules of grammar; they just don't know the proper grammatical name to call a certain phrase, word, or use of both.  I do agree when she does talk about using conventions as grammar in the editing process.  In complete honesty how many of us actually go back and edit our papers?  On the rare occasion that we do, how many of us look for grammatical or mechanical mistakes over coherency or fluidity?  Therefore teaching mechanics during the editing process I think would be a very useful tacit.