English 326: DOL

After reading Crovitz’s points on error analysis I’ve got to say that I agree with the issues being presented. I remember doing similar exercises in my early grammar classes and thinking to myself that while I was able to identify errors when I knew one was present, it was difficult for me to find them in my own writing. The DOL style isn’t realistic. It thrusts students into an environment where they know they are looking for an error, so it is not surprising when students find one (Compound sentence: two independent clauses joined by a “,so”). I think the intention behind DOL is good, and in a way it makes sense: practice makes perfect right? However, in trying to create an isolated environment where errors can be clearly identified, it robs the students of the ability to identify errors in more complexed, and realistic, sentences and works. Additionally, the activity feeds into the general issue of negativity when dealing with grammar. “What is wrong with this sentence?” “How do we fix this sentence.” Etc.. It is an exercise that, in my mind at least, is a good concept but is flawed in its execution.

So how do you fix it? I still like the idea that practice makes perfect, but just as a baseball team doesn’t practice by playing catch for two hours, we cannot expect students to learn when they are placed in a highly simplified environment. To correct this, I believe DOL could still be used, but it should utilize more difficult sentences. Instead of asking students what is wrong with a sentence like:

James go to the store yesterday

Instead pose the question to students, “What, if anything, is wrong with this sentence”:

James, having just witnessed the last BLT be devoured let out a desperate wail.

The sentences need to be more difficult, and should not always have something wrong with them. Perhaps sentences could be taken from novels that the students might be reading, just to increase the relatability. However, the negative approach to learning grammar is still present and the isolation of a sentence is still just as big of an issue.

With this in mind I’d like to get away from DOL, though not completely abandon it, and focus more on creation than destruction. I think it would be effective to teach students and then have them construct sentences that utilize that new concept. Instead of finding what should be and isn’t, students instead get to utilize their knowledge to create something. Hopefully, this will instill in them the same understanding of how and when to utilize a certain grammar tool that DOL hopes to do, without the negativity associated with correcting a sentence. I still think that finding errors in a sentence is important for editing purposes, but I think that through creative learning, supplemented with some more complexed DOL, that goal can be achieved without the simplistic repetition of error analysis.    

English 325: Marcelo in the Real World

I really enjoyed this novel. I think the reason behind this is because, at its core, this is a coming of age story. Everyone at some point in their life has to step out from their comfort zone and enter “the real world.” I don’t see the real world as a derogatory term towards Marcelo, while I think it may have connotations that indicate that his world isn’t “real”, I think it is simply a term that is used to describe the environment that the large majority of people operate in. Marcelo joining the “real world” is a triumph, made greater by the fact that he did not have to lose himself in order to join it. This story may have a character with someone on the spectrum, but that’s not what the novel is about. This is a tale about growth, about discovering how incredibly terrible yet simultaneously beautiful the world can be. The plot is engaging, the progression of Marcelo is fantastic, and the themes of growing up to face a new, scary, and exciting world are incredibly relatable to almost everyone.

Despite my feelings towards the novel, it’s not perfect. I found that a lot of the characters, with the exception of Marcelo, were too one dimensional. Arturo is the clueless and ignorant father who just doesn’t understand. Jasmine is the beautiful girl with big dreams. Rabbi Heschel is the wise mentor. Ixtel is the sad hopeless victim saved by our hero’s brave and selfless acts. Wendell is unrealistically unlikeable, with no redeeming features whatsoever. There’s nothing wrong with these characters, but they are very cookie cutter. I give this novel a lot of credit for giving us a different type of hero, but it fails to provide a similarly complexed villain. Instead we are left with a stereotypical jerk, an oblivious father, and an evil corporation. Yeah, I haven’t seen that before.  

In a way I already addressed how this story is relatable above. This is a coming of age story. I find nearly everything about this book is either relatable or will be relatable. It doesn’t matter that the readers, for the most part, are not on the spectrum; the vast majority will be able to relate to the themes of the novel. The fear of a first job. Nervousness about leaving your comfort zone is completely normal. First love is also something pretty close to home. The battle between what is right and wrong is an incredibly human issue. I like this novel because I think it does the job of both a young adult literature book, and something from the cannon. It has relatability but also very adult world issues and themes. Have I said I liked this novel yet?

Not going to say it again. Though not without its flaws, I really enjoyed this one. With that in mind, I give it a solid A-.   

English 325: Blog #2

This text is interesting in that it is both incredibly depressing while at the same time being rather uplifting. The novel is centered on hope, even in the darkest of times. It is a beautiful story in its representation of humanity. It illustrates the most despicable, heinous, and dark acts that we, as humans, are capable, but it also focuses on how despite those things, the spirit of humanity is strong. Despite all the pain, loss, and tragedy we can carry on. Nothing, no matter how menacing, is a hopeless situation. This is not to say that bad things do not happen, the novel is practically a list of terrible things that occur. Rather, the idea here is that in the end, our hero survives. Not only that, she survives and finds love and happiness. Lina wins. For twelve years she lived through hell, but in the end she overcomes it all. This is a story about hope, contrasted by one of the darkest deeds in world history. I found the theme noble, clear, and well presented.

In reality I don’t know if hope could survive in that situation. The novel may approach a terrible subject with a slight rosy perspective (Though it clearly does not ignore the terrible things that people had to endure) by having a hopeful message. In reality, perhaps the situation would have broken the will of every individual and extinguished any flame of hope. I think that is beside the point however. The novel wants us to believe that hope can in fact endure, and honestly I agree with it. Call me a romantic, but I believe the human spirit is a hard thing to break, that no matter how many times we’re pushed down, we keep trying to get back up again. We find a light in the darkness, something to hold unto and we don’t let go.

I like this novel, but I think it fails to do what we’ve said the goal of young adult literature is: to be relatable. Yes, the main character is a teenager, but it doesn’t really feel like it. The problems that Lina faces are not teenage problems, they are very disturbing results of an incredibly adult and evil world. This novel is great in talking about adult issues, and for that reason I would almost place it closer to something like 1984 than say Eleanor and Park. This book doesn’t focus on being a teenager, it focuses on being human. There is nothing wrong with this at all, and frankly I like it, but just because the main character is a teenager doesn’t mean that it revolves around teenage issues.

Overall, I liked the novel. Like I said before I didn’t really see it as a Young Adult Lit book, but I still enjoyed it. It highlights a dark time in world history, but also provides a positive message. For whatever reason though, I was never completely enthralled with the novel; I never felt like I needed to keep reading. For that reason, I give the novel a B+.  

English 326: Blog #2

In this post I worked on using the semi-colon. I like the idea of melding two closely connected but still independent thoughts into one closely tied idea.

Reading the Christensen article and the first two chapters of Grammar Alive! has really changed how I look at grammar and how I will one day teach it. I was always under the impression that teaching grammar would be a systematic and orderly practice of the rules of Standard English. While I think to a certain extent that is still partly the goal, I have become aware that grammar is much more than simply being able to correctly place a comma or semi-colon.

I think that the two works are bound together by the common idea that no form of English is “correct” or “incorrect”; they are both bent on proving that to simply assume that there is only one correct way to write English is a ridiculous and ignorant position. This idea is most clearly illustrated in Grammar Alive! when defining goal C for teaching grammar, “Every student will complete school with an understanding of, and appreciation for, the natural variation that occurs in language across time, social situation, and social group” (Haussamen 4).

This sentiment is mirrored in Christensen, “As teachers, we daily opportunities to affirm that our students’ lives and languages are unique and important.” (Christensen 102).Both of these statements accurately summarize the general theme of acceptance and understanding of everyone’s own culture and language.

The articles also agree however that while it is important to understand and respects students’ own languages, it is also our mission as teachers to teach them Standard English. In Grammar Alive!, this is the central focus of goal A which states that all students should be able to comfortably communicate in both spoken and written English (Haussamen 3-5). Christensen also concurs on this state, though it does appear that she only does this to prepare students for, in her mind at least, an unfair and judgmental world. She calls Standard English the “language of power” says she teaches the “rules” simply because to not do so would be to cheat her students (Christensen 103). Christensen also stresses that it is important to teach Standard English without humiliating students and making them feel like their language is any lesser.

I think at this point in my post it is only fitting that I talk about my feelings on this subject. Now I completely agree that students should know that their own language is not in any way less than any other language. Inclusion and acceptance of every person’s own language is definitely important and something I will set out to do as a future educator. I get the feeling however that both of these works, but more so Christensen, are upset that Standard English dominates; I think she does not like the idea that one type of English is elevated, through its widespread teaching, above the others. I really have no issue with this however. I don’t think that having a standard language that everyone can fall back on is a bad thing in any way. Everyone is clearly entitled to their own language, but I don’t think that by having one “standard” it means we have to look down on the others. A standard language, allows for easier communication between all people and, if taught correctly, does not demean anyone’s own language. It serves to unite, not divide.