Writing 2 Project 2

Jiaan (Jeffrey) Han

Instructor: Jesse Mikhail Wesso

June 8, 2023

Blog

How to improve grammar education for unexperienced young students?

Jiaan Han

English grammar education is fundamental for secondary and high school students. It

guides students to learn basic sentence construction techniques and to craft precise,

well-structured sentences. We all know that there are many challenges in teaching

grammar to adolescent students. Most students are accustomed to oral communication

and informal writing, yet lack experience in formal writing, with its myriad genres

and purposes. This lack of familiarity often results in a conflict between personal

dialects and standard writing conventions. Furthermore, for students whose first

language isn’t English, there may be conflicts between their native language

conventions and English forms.

The debate around leveraging students' existing language proficiency to teach

grammar dates back approximately 40 years. As an international college student who

is a non-native English speaker, I find this discussion intriguing since it prompts me

reflect on my experiences of learning English grammar. In this blog, I’d like to

introduce this conversation to you.

Building Grammar on Existing Knowledge

This idea of building grammar on students’

existing knowledge gained significant

attention after Robert DeBeaugrande

presented his article “Forward to the Basics:

Getting Down to Grammar”, in which he

suggested that English grammar instruction

should be simplified to make the concepts

accessible to anybody who can communicate in English. He proposed the idea to

inspire students to study grammar by capitalizing on their own oral communication

skills. With proper guidance, students can actively discover the differences between

formal grammar and their oral languages to improve.

DeBeaugrande’s article was partially a response to an earlier article, “Sentence

Combining in an ESL Writing Program” by David M. Davidson. Davidson offered

several strategies for teaching sentence combining as a crucial part of grammar

instruction. Debeaugrande, in contrast, prefer students to build grammar on existing

sentence patterns over combining simple sentences to more complex ones.

Stronger Text Constructions by Grammar Learned from Existing Skills

Charles Coleman analyzed the conflicts

between oral language and written English

in his study. He used the theory of

phonological transfer to illustrate the

features of learning grammar based on oral

languages. He supported Debeaugrande’s

idea of building grammar upon oral

knowledge but suggested that grammar instructions should always acknowledge the

differences between oral language and written text and implement proper methods to

correct potential errors in formal writing caused by oral conventions.

Based on Debeaugrande’s idea and Coleman’s analysis, James Kenkel and Robert

Yates developed the idea of constructing students’ grammar knowledge on existing

skills. They developed the approach by guiding students through purposeful

questioning and practices. They believe such a practice to construct sentences on

purpose can help students gradually develop grammar skills. After given students such

practice to construct texts themselves, they compare the students’ texts with those of

mature writers to help them improve. They discussed that Debeaugrande’s idea was

confined that it didn’t solve why students use incorrect sentence structures, and they

developed better approaches based on it.

Is it useful to teach formal grammar?

It is important to acknowledge that there are people who presented doubts of this

teaching approach. Author Patrick Hartwell discussed the practical implication of

teaching formal grammar to students. Though he weren’t directly against the method

of teaching grammar to students from building their own knowledge, he argued that it

might leave students feeling confused.

In comparison, Lynn Briggs and Ann Watts Pailliotet discussed the power of teaching

formal grammar to students. They proposed that teaching formal grammar could

effectively incorporate students’ skills into academic writing contexts, further

supporting Debeaugrande’s proposal. However, they also believed that traditional

formal grammar teaching like Davidson’s approach is useful in some cases.

Reflection

I was drawn to this topic due to its strong resonance with my personal experience. As

an international student, I struggled with learning English grammar during my early

educational years. This struggle mainly stemmed from my tendency to merge the

language conventions of my native tongue with English norms. Also, I often feel

perplexed on whether to use more complicated vocabulary and sentence structures to

make my writing appear more precise and professional. In my perspective, the study

of grammar should go beyond just learning the English conventions of vocabulary and

sentence usage. It should also involve learning authentic expressions that serve

purposes and ensure readers feel comfortable. However, I still hope to know how

professional English scholars perceive the problem of teaching English grammar. I

believe this will help me find paths to better incorporate my formal writing skills and

speaking skills.

After searching through many articles, I found the debate on teaching English

grammar by building upon existing oral communication skills particularly captivating.

I was keen to understand the strategies native English speakers believe could help

students improve their English writing skills. And after digging through various ideas,

I discovered that these methods differed significantly from how I was taught English

grammar. In my high school, our primary mode of practicing grammar involved

filling blanks in sentences. This problem-solving training helped us know many strict

grammar rules but didn’t aid us in constructing appealing sentences in actual writing.

While delving into these scholars’ ideas of teaching grammar, I discovered a fresh

approach to combine my existing English skills.

This conversation also arises partly because of the research on teaching English

grammar to English as a Second Language (ESL) students. These teachers and

scholars face similar problems with me, only from the perspective of an instructor.

The primary concern is how to better transform students from novice to proficient

writers and communicators via grammar instruction. This conversation doesn’t feature

direct disagreements, but the scholars still share different opinions and doubts.

DeBeaugrande, Coleman, Kenkel and Yates clearly analyzed the feasibility of

grammar instruction based on existing oral and writing skills. Kenkel and Yates

developed former ideas and proposed ways to improve these methods. Their method

contradicted the former idea of Davidson, who believed the teaching of sentence
combining is crucial for effective grammar instruction. Also, Hartwell doubted this

idea by questioning the utility of such formal grammar teaching in developing formal

writing skills. There were no clear turning points in this discussion, instead, they

deepened the conversation through progressive academic analysis. They also used

more practical examples to illustrate their ideas and doubts. The authors talk by

referencing each other’s works and analyzing their examples. The later articles also

developed former ideas by pointing out their flaws and presenting deeper approaches

to fix the problem. The most memorable lines for me are the words from

DeBeaugrande’s work, “The many unresolved problems in linguistics are due, I think,

to the impossibility of constructing a complete grammar in the abstract”. This

sentence is like the Declaration of Independence of this new approach of teaching

grammar. It highlighted the lack of connection between teachers’ instruction and

students’ actual knowledge in grammar classes and spurred later discussions on the

two approaches.

This conversation resembles a discourse community conversation like those presented

in Melzer’s article. First, the authors have a common public goal of improving

English grammar instruction to unexperienced students. Second, they communicate

with each other through citing each other’s work and analyzing their examples, then

analyzing their defects and proposing their opinion. Sometimes they don’t directly

disagree with each other but show doubt through their professional analysis of the

same concept. Third, they used citations, examples and analysis to provide feedbacks,

resembling a clear and strict academic discussion. Moreover, they do not only use
professional analysis, but also use real-world examples and investigations to diversify

their discussion materials and bolster their arguments. Finally, since they are all

instructors and scholars of English grammar, they use specific terminology like

“phonological transfer” and “discourse features” to enhance the accuracy of the

discussion. In the discussion, there are experts like DeBeaugrande and Coleman who

can lead the discussion and make the contexts more academic.

Upon reading this conversation, I reflected on my journey of learning grammar. I

observed the differences between native English speaker instructors and those

instructors who learned English as a second language. The teachers who learned

English as a second language mostly adhere to the doctrines of formal grammar and

focus on the details of exact sentences and vocabulary. This kind of instruction made

me expert in exams, but ignorant when writing actual writing in formal discussions.

On the other hand, these scholars proposed the idea to connect writing with speaking,

to develop grammar by existing oral skills. In my opinion, this could link writing with

speaking and other real-life communications, which enables us to understand how

these formal grammar conventions are employed in actual discussions. The insights

from these articles taught me that no academic discipline is isolated. Instead, we

should learn and teach them in a connected and interactive way.

After researching on this discussion, I’d like to dive deeper into techniques for

crafting a more descriptive and persuasive article with authentic English sentences

akin to a native speaker. This stems from my realization that my writing still cannot

escape the conventions of my native language. Also, sometimes I find myself

uncertain about where I should use more complex words and expressions, which

makes my articles sometimes sound overly “professional” or “bureaucratic”. The

pursuit of mastering a more native expression in English writing is a long path for me,

and I believe it will involve more reading of authentic English texts and discussion on

how to improve English writing.

In this experience of searching through the discussion, I also honed my ability to

identify connections between academic articles and uncover their conversations,

conflicts and developments. I believe this skill will undoubtedly be beneficial in my

later academic career, since any research involves the discovery of insightful

academic discussions and the generation of new ideas from these discussions.

Bibliography

1. Kenkel, James, and Robert Yates. “A Developmental Perspective on the

Relationship between Grammar and Text.” Journal of Basic Writing 22, no. 1 (2003):

35–49. https://doi.org/10.37514/jbw-j.2003.22.1.06. 

2. Coleman, Charles F. “Our Students Write with Accents. Oral Paradigms for ESD

Students.” College Composition and Communication 48, no. 4 (1997): 486–500.

https://doi.org/10.2307/358454.

3. Briggs, Lynn, and Ann Watts Pailliotet. “A Story about Grammar and

Power.” Journal of Basic Writing 16, no. 2 (1997): 46–61.

https://doi.org/10.37514/jbw-j.1997.16.2.04. 
4. Hartwell, Patrick. “Grammar, Grammars, and the Teaching of Grammar.” College

English 47, no. 2 (1985): 105–27. https://doi.org/10.2307/376562.

5. DeBeaugrande, Robert. “Forward to the Basics: Getting Down to

Grammar.” College Composition and Communication35, no. 3 (1984): 358–67.

https://doi.org/10.2307/357464.

6. Davidson, David M. “Sentence Combining in an ESL Writing Program.” Journal of

Basic Writing 1, no. 3 (1977): 49–62. https://doi.org/10.37514/jbw-j.1977.1.3.02. 

7. Dan, Melzer. “Understanding Discourse Communities.” Essay. In Writing Spaces:

Readings on Writing, 100–115. Parlor Press, 2020.