Running head: GRAMMAR INSTRUCTION
Commonplaces in High School Grammar Instruction
Jessica Sulmeisters
University of Northern Colorado
1
GRAMMAR INSTRUCTION
2
The place of grammar instruction in the classroom has been debated for decades. Many
educators have become ambivalent towards grammar instruction, which has in turn caused them
to stop teaching it all together (Gibbin, 2005). When teachers are not sure of how or why to
teach a subject they tend to slide it to the side and forget about it, which begs the question: why
aren’t educators finding a better way to teach grammar?
Upon studying the Daily Grammar Practice (DGP) curriculum that is required in District
6 it became evident of the commonplaces that were used by the author while creating the
curriculum. Connelly and Clandinin (1988) emphasize the necessity of all of the commonplaces
to be apparent in a curriculum in order for it to be adequate. The creator of DGP took all of the
commonplaces into account, but definitely favored some of the commonplaces over others.
When first looking at the curriculum, it is apparent that the author is partial to the subject
matter at hand. The subject matter is emphasized through vocabulary and sentence
diagramming. There is not any recall back to prior knowledge or schema building. The
assignment is strictly focused on the current grammar skill that needs to be taught. The
assignments that are required in the curriculum are all student based while teachers assist.
Teachers are able to get the subject matter across in a fairly straightforward way. Students are
asked to fill in a worksheet that addresses all of the steps of diagraming a sentence which
guidance from the teacher. Teachers and the subject matter dominate the classroom grammar
instruction. While this does get the curriculum across it seems as though it is not as geared
toward the learner or the milieu of a classroom.
During the course of completing a sentence diagraming worksheet the students frequently
fail to see the link between diagraming and their own writing. Since that connection is not made
students struggle to see the importance of completing DGP which in turn impacts the learner and
GRAMMAR INSTRUCTION
3
milieu of the classroom. Many students become agitated about the subject matter because they
are not able to understand how it could possibly be something that they need to know. Lack of
understanding effects the milieu of the classroom. More students begin to question the necessity
of DGP. When more students start questioning why a certain subject matter is important,
especially subject matter that the teacher feels ambivalent about, it results in students being
unwilling to learn.
However, not the entire DGP curriculum is teacher and subject matter centered. Towards
the end of each worksheet it asks students to reflect on their diagramming and apply their
learning. Students need to create a sentence of their own that mimics the structure of the
sentence that they previously diagrammed. Milieu also becomes apparent when the students are
given some time to write their own example sentence because it allows them a chance to interact
with their peers. This focuses the curriculum much more on the learner and milieu versus the
teacher and subject matter.
In general the DGP curriculum starts with the teacher and subject matter then ends with
the milieu and student. DGP does cover the four commonplaces, but probably could use a bit of
restructuring in order to better reach students. Both the learner and the milieu need to play more
of a part in the DPG curriculum. There are many studies to support the use subject matter that is
already being used in the classroom as a means of teaching grammar. Using existing texts that
directly connect to what is already happening in class helps students to associate DGP with what
they are already learning. Curnow (2013) argues that teachers could use many different
strategies to teach grammar that would be more effective, such as text manipulation, using
analogies, juxtaposition of texts, identification of patters, and games to facilitate grammar
education. By using a variety of mediums to teach grammar students are more prone to being
GRAMMAR INSTRUCTION
4
engaged because they are not bored, making this method more student centered. Also, it would
allow for the class to become more interactive which would benefit the milieu of the classroom.
Subject matter would still be the primary focus; however, the method of delivery would change
thus making the learner more involved and the teacher less involved. The class would become
less lecture based and more student interaction based.
Another endorser of teaching grammar through games is Tuan and Doan (2010). These
two researchers looked at the ways that games could positively impact the education of grammar
in English classrooms. Their findings showed that all students benefitted from learning grammar
in a game oriented setting as opposed to the traditional teacher centered method of grammar
instruction. Grammar instruction through student interaction and games has been especially
helpful to English language learners (Tuan & Doan, 2010). Due to the interaction provided by
games English language learners were able to better relate to their peers and bridge
communication gaps that they were experiencing. This approach also was more student and
milieu centered rather than teacher centered.
Over the course of history there have been many changes to curriculums and teaching
methods; however, grammar instruction is one of the few curriculums that did not undergo a
drastic transition. The traditional methods for teaching grammar in many cases are disjointed
and unrelated to other assignments in the class. Due to the disjointed nature of the traditional
method of grammar instruction it becomes necessary to begin to transition the method of
instruction to a more innovative approach. By using things such as games, juxtaposition and
manipulation of text, the teacher will hopefully be able to reach students in a more effective
manner. The commonplace focus of an adapted DGP curriculum will have some teacher
instruction but will mainly be centered around student driven learning and will result in an
GRAMMAR INSTRUCTION
5
improved milieu due to student interaction. Teachers will have to find a way to assess the
outcomes of said games and grammar instruction methods, but overall should employ a more
effective method of instruction for their students.
GRAMMAR INSTRUCTION
6
References
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as curriculum planners: Narratives of
experience. Toronto, Ont; New York, NY: Teachers College Press, Teachers College.
Columbia University.
Curnow, A. (2013). Practical strategies for teaching grammar. Literacy Learning: The Middle
Years, 21(3), i(12).
Gribbin, B. (2005). Our ambivalence toward teaching grammar. English Journal, 94(3), 17.
Tuan, L. T., & Doan, N. T. M. (2010). Teaching english grammar through games. Studies in
Literature and Language, 1(7), 61-75.