Anti Semantic

Yesterday, I was called anti Semantic. I cannot be anti Semitic; I am a Semite: clearly, they meant that I am anti Semantic. I have to admit that I am not that great when it comes to my skill in using our language. However, I am not opposed to it. I wonder if I am the only who is anti Semantic. Are there more of us, out there, seeking to marginalize and destroy the English language out of our own ignorance? I am sure that any teacher of composition would not disagree.

My teaching, as of late, has been anti semantic – or at least against what would be considered the best practice for teaching children to literate writers able to communicate ideas. I have been prevailed upon to drill students in the parts of speech and sentence structure over the actual, practical uses of our language. I am sure that no one thinks that George W. Bush is an imbecile because of his ability or inability to differentiate an adverb from an adjective; we think he is an imbecile when we hear him speak or read his writing.

Despite the fact that research proves that just drilling students in the parts of speech neither improves their grammar in writing nor raises test scores, people still insist upon instruction following those same lines. The best, research proven ways to teach are discarded by teachers and administrators because the right way is labor intensive. Parents disregard them because they are low on worksheets coming home laden with stickers and red marks.

The conundrum of curriculum planning for teachers is: what parents like, and what is easy to grade fairly is usually not work that demonstrates or fosters learning; what actually promotes learning requires subjective grading and is generally disliked by parents because it is (understandably) hard to understand.

So, will I teach the right way or the way that makes people happy? Unfortunately, I want a good recommendation so I will be teaching the way that promotes happiness so I can move on with my life.

In other news, I noticed that Michael Jackson had been called to serve jury duty. I am not sure what the jury is being convened for but I do know this: I would not want him on a jury of my peers.

Comments

[Summer Gale]

technically he has no record .. that stinks!

[l-empress]

Regarding the teaching of grammar, I beg to disagree. Studying parts of speech was invaluable, not only in English but in other languages as well. I hope you would consider me a literate person anyhow.

[Alex Vance]

Interesting. I am the product of public schools and I was NEVER taught anything about parts of speech until I started learning German in High School. Much less diagramming sentences, which I thought was a put-on when I first heard about it.
We learned English by reading, often out loud. And by writing "power paragraphs," and rewriting them until the mistakes were gone. I don't remember being taught any rules at all.

[Margaret]

Many people learn about grammar and sentence structure in foreign language classes; JUST knowledge of grammar can never make someone a good writer however. Writing is a craft that must be taught, practiced, critiqued and labored over. There are no simple answers. Our younger daughter finally has a wonderful English teacher; she is now reading books, writing papers, and asking ME to help her find the perfect word or phrase for what she wants to express. It is kind of exciting.

[Christopher]

Nothing improves your language skills like learning another language.