Pennington Publishing Blog

Okay. I may have crossed over to the dark side of The Force. For years, I smirked at the grammar fanatics who taught and had students practice the explicit grammatical components of the sentence. I insisted, along with my National Writing Project friends, that any grammar instruction outside of the authentic writing context was at best useless, and at its worst counter-productive. But now the Common Core State Standards have shifted my thinking. The separate Language Strand makes sense to me.

This balanced approach best makes sense of the grammar research. An approach that involves direct grammatical instruction in partnership with plenty of connected reading (sentence modeling) and writing (sentence manipulation). It’s working well with my students.

Here’s a quick summary of the two prominent theories of language acquisition and why I’ve “crossed over” to a balanced approach with grammar instruction.

My university professors taught me that all humans are born with an instinctive language acquisition device (LAD). Noam Chomsky’s “little black box,” tucked away in some corner of our brains, gives us the essential grammar rules and language organization that helps us master our native language. Cool. So all we teachers need to do is provide a literate environment, extensive modeling, and plenty of oral language practice for our students to effortlessly learn to speak and write “conventional” and “correct” English. Since the LAD is a universal grammar, the same instructional methods would work for English-language learners. Simple. Grammar that is caught is better than grammar that is taught.

Much better than the older B.F. Skinner approach that humans acquire language through the environmental interplay of stimulus and response, reward and punishment. With this behavioral model, teaching “conventional” and “correct” English would require learning good language habits. That would mean lots of direct grammar instruction, drill and kill exercises, and extensive teacher feedback (think boxes of red pens for error correction). Lots of work. Have to learn what a predicate adjective is… Grammar that is taught is better than grammar that is caught.

An eclectic approach to language acquisition theory that has gained traction in recent years has encouraged me to meld the above theories in my instructional practice. This interactionist approach posits the idea that “language develops as a result of the complex interplay between the uniquely human characteristics of the child and the environment in which the child develops” (Lightbown and Spada, 1999). In other words, a sort of umbrella approach encompassing Chomsky’s LAD and Skinner’s behaviorism. Now, this makes both instructional and practical sense to me.

In my class, I teach one mechanics and one grammar function at the sentence level. Students tell “what’s right” and “what’s wrong” in an interactive discussion, while they jot down the rules/skills with examples. They analyze how the grammar rule/skill is applied in a model literary sentence and in a student model sentence that I select and display (reading connection). Students complete a simple sentence diagram to see the function of the grammar within the sentence. Students read and analyze a mentor text, which uses the grammar, usage, or mechanics instructional focus. Then students apply what they’ve learned in their own short writing sample. I give dictation sentences that require students to apply the rules/skills and/or manipulate the sentence structure as a formative assessment. Students self-edit and self-correct from my display (writing connection). I often review the grammatical component with a humorous cartoon that focuses on the grammatical skill/rule. It’s working. This instruction takes 25 minutes per session and I teach this strategy twice per week. Much better than D.O.L. or D.L.R. because I have a planned, standards-based instructional scope and sequence. I’m not just “reviewing” what previous teachers purportedly have “taught.”

Oh, I also use a whole-class diagnostic grammar and mechanics assessment and differentiate instruction according to the diagnostic data through targeted worksheets. Shhh! Don’t tell my Writing Project purist friends. But, the extra practice along with my quick writers conferences to review each worksheet’s formative assessment is helping students to finally master (a split infinitive) what teachers have “taught” year after year. And it’s transferring to their writing. I give the students about 15 minutes, twice per week, to work on their worksheets and complete their writers conferences. Students see their own progress on the skills they need.

*****

Get the Grammar and Mechanics Grades 4-8 Instructional Scope and Sequence FREE Resource:

 

 

 

 

 

 

*****

Teaching Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics (Grades 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and High School) are full-year, traditional, grade-level grammar, usage, and mechanics programs with plenty of remedial practice to help students catch up while they keep up with grade-level standards. Twice-per-week, 30-minute, no prep lessons in print or interactive Google slides with a fun secret agent theme. Simple sentence diagrams, mentor texts, video lessons, sentence dictations. Plenty of practice in the writing context. Includes biweekly tests and a final exam.

Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Interactive Notebook (Grades 4‒8) is a full-year, no prep interactive notebook without all the mess. Twice-per-week, 30-minute, no prep grammar, usage, and mechanics lessons, formatted in Cornell Notes with cartoon response, writing application, 3D graphic organizers (easy cut and paste foldables), and great resource links. No need to create a teacher INB for student make-up work—it’s done for you! Plus, get remedial worksheets, biweekly tests, and a final exam.

Syntax in Reading and Writing is a function-based, sentence-level syntax program, designed to build reading comprehension and increase writing sophistication. The 18 parts of speech, phrases, and clauses lessons are each leveled from basic (elementary) to advanced (middle and high school) and feature 5 lesson components (10–15 minutes each): 1. Learn It!  2. Identify It!  3. Explain It! (analysis of challenging sentences) 4. Revise It! (kernel sentences, sentence expansion, syntactic manipulation) 5. Create It! (Short writing application with the syntactic focus in different genre).

Get the Diagnostic Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Assessments, Matrix, and Final Exam FREE Resource:

Grammar/Mechanics, Spelling/Vocabulary, Writing D.L.R., D.O.L., grammar, grammar research, grammar worksheets, how to teach grammar, Mark Pennington, mechanics

A recent discussion on my favorite site, the English Companion Ning, made me take a critical look at just what has engendered the recent demands for increased accountability in our public schools. Both Democrats and Republicans are playing the blame game and teachers are the easiest targets. As a public school teacher, my initial response has been defensive; however, upon a bit of reflection I’m thinking that teachers may well largely be to blame–not for the “sorry state of public education” as our critics claim, but for the very accountability movement that is being used to attack us. We teachers are often our own worst enemies.

A bit of history helps put things in perspective. Back in the 1970s and early 1980s teachers felt that our norm-referenced testing, such as the ITBS, SAT, CTBS, MAT, provided data that did not measure what we are teaching. We used sophisticated psychometric criticisms such as sampling and measurement error and socio-political criticisms such as bias to largely rid ourselves from the nuisances of these exams. We teachers went wild. Authentic assessments, multiple-measure assessments, and no assessments ruled the educational landscape. I once taught a sophomore world history class for an entire year without giving any traditional tests.

However, with teacher-created assessments, testing manufacturers lost money. Educational Testing Services and others do not like to lose money. So, the test manufacturers changed tactics. They asked for and gave teachers what teachers said they wanted–tests that purport to test what we teach. In other words, criterion-referenced standards tests. And the standards-based movement was born.

Teachers were even asked to develop their own subject area standards. A seemingly bottom-up initiative. How inclusive! Each state department of education, county office of education, and most school districts funded the creation of these subject area content standards documents. I joined other colleagues in spending countless hours developing the English-language Arts Standards for my own school district.

Now the test-makers were happy. They had the basis of a new revenue stream. And, now because the tests ostensibly test what teachers teach, administrators, politicians, and even billionaire do-gooders can hold us accountable and measure teacher/school/district/state performance. The zenith? Our Common Core National Standards.

Teachers helped create this mess. We enabled the accountability movement that is choking teacher creativity, teacher autonomy, and teacher initiative. And our students are the ones who are paying the greatest price. In replacing normed-reference testing with criterion-reference testing, we replaced something bad with something worse. “Meet the new boss.” Not the same as the old boss. Apologies to Pete Townshend.

And now the standards-based movement is so endemic that any challenges to teaching to the test or resisting accountability standards are viewed with wonderment by many in our profession. The standards-based movement with its frame of accountability is fully entrenched. Newer teachers have known nothing else. With the new PAARC and Smarter Balanced Common Core assessments, the tail is wagging the dog once again. Teachers are spending valuable class time test prepping and changing instruction to be more test-friendly. The tests themselves take an inordinate amount of class time. Last year at my middle school, we English-language arts teachers had the task of testing all subject area. It took two weeks out of our teaching schedule to administer all of the tests.

Sigh. More on Valerie Strauss’ Washington Post site.

Response from Maja Wilson, author of Rethinking Rubrics in Writing Assessment (Heinemann, 2006) and the recent article, “First blame the teachers then the parents”  in the Washington Post.

Mark,

This is why I argue that trying to get and maintain a “seat at the table” is ultimately counterproductive. The meal served at the table of power is unhealthy, the conversation is stilted (actually, there isn’t much conversation–lots of orders given and followed) and those who partake leave with indigestion. That’s what happened when teachers created standards–following orders at the table–that were then used against them as the basis first for high-stakes standardized tests, and then as a springboard for national standards created by a corporation created by governors and business interests (Achieve Inc).

Instead, we should create, set, and decorate another table, then serve a tasty and healthy meal there. We could invite as many people to join as possible, and then enjoy a rich conversation and lots of laughter together as we dine.

Michael (another poster to Maja’s initial post) may be right that the problem is that we can’t agree on what to serve at that table. But hey, even a potluck would be tastier, healthier, and more socially edifying than the cardboard and nails currently on the Department of Education’s menu.

The author of this article, Mark Pennington, has written the assessment-based Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary  Grades 4-8 programs to teach the Common Core Language Standards. Each

full-year program provides 56 interactive grammar, usage, and mechanics and include sentence diagrams, error analysis, mentor texts, writing applications, and sentence dictation formative assessments with accompanying worksheets (L.1, 2). Plus, each grade-level program has weekly spelling pattern tests and accompanying spelling sort worksheets (L.2), 56 language application opener worksheets (L.3), and 56 vocabulary worksheets with multiple-meaning words, Greek and Latin word parts, figures of speech, word relationships with context clue practice, connotations, and four square academic language practice (L.4, 5, and 6). Comprehensive biweekly unit tests measure recognition, understanding, and application of all language components.

Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary  also has the resources to meet the needs of diverse learners. Diagnostic grammar, usage, mechanics, and spelling assessments provide the data to enable teachers to individualize instruction with targeted worksheets. Each remedial worksheet (over 200 per program) includes independent practice and a brief formative assessment. Students CATCH Up on previous unmastered Standards while they KEEP UP with current grade-level Standards. Check out the YouTube introductory video of the Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary  program.

 

Reading, Writing assessment and accountability, Common Core Standards, Common Core State ELA Standards, Common Core State English Standards, Common Core State Standards, Common Core State Writing Standards, diagnostic assessments, diagnostic reading assessments, education standards, ELA, ELA in-service, ELA instruction, ELA scope and sequence, ELA standards, ELA teaching tips, ELA time management, English curriculum, English grammar, English standards, English-language arts, English-language Arts standards, formative assessments, grammar, grammar standards, how to teach ELA standards, IDEA, IEP, listening and speaking standards, Mark Pennington, math programs, mechanics, national ELA standards, national how to teach ELA standards, national standards, progress monitoring, race to the top, reading intervention, reading programs, reading standards, remedial math, remedial reading, response to intervention, RTI, special education, standards-based, student study teams, teaching English, teaching literature, teaching spelling, vocabulary standards, word analysis, word study, writing standards, writing strategies

How do most teachers teach grammar and mechanics? Frankly, many of us just are not teaching these subjects, except as a few weeks of drill and kill worksheets prior to the standardized test. Teachers either perceive grammar and mechanics instruction as too boring or as too difficult to teach, so they avoid it like the plague. Some teachers may rationalize why they don’t teach these subjects. You’ve heard the comments: “I didn’t learn grammar and mechanics, and I turned out all right” or “I teach grammar and mechanics through the writing process” or “The students should already know these skills—these are not my grade level standards” or “I once that grammar is acquired naturally through oral language development.”

Well-meaning teachers borrowed a well-used copy of Daily Oral Language activities from another teacher years ago and have faithfully used the same lessons as “openers” ever since. The advantage of such “programs” is that they require no teacher preparation. Unfortunately, these collections of grammar and mechanics mistakes provide no diagnostic information, have few teaching resources, and fail to establish a sensible instructional scope and sequence. Students simply rehearse errors. This ineffective practice rarely translates to mastery learning. Learning grammar and mechanics out of the context of meaningful writing may help students get a few questions correct on the standardized test, but this knowledge just won’t transfer to their writing.

As a middle and high school ELA teacher, I’ve always favored a balanced approach to teaching grammar, usage, and mechanics in the context of reading, writing, listening, and speaking. Like many veteran teachers I’ve found that openers, daily edits, and mini-lesson approaches rarely produced student retention and simply did not show up in student writing and speaking. With the advent of the Common Core State Standards, I welcomed the death knell of these approaches and found the specifics of the grade-level Language Standards, coupled with the Progressive Skills Review, a more realistic and productive approach to instruction. I’ve always believed in the dual role of teachers to help students keep up with rigorous grade-level instruction, while they catch up with content and skill deficits through individualized assessment-based instruction.

Teachers do favor different instructional approaches, and a variety of methods are certainly useful. I’ve written and taught the grades 4–high school Teaching Grammar and Mechanics with interactive lectures, practice and error analysis, simple sentence diagrams, mentor texts with writing applications, formative assessments, and bi-weekly unit tests. I’ve also found value in the interactive notebook approach, authoring and piloting the grades 4–8 Teaching Grammar and Mechanics Interactive Notebooks. Additionally, I so appreciate the contribution of linguists, such as the late William Van Cleve, who advocated a “third camp” to focus on a sentence-level function approach. My Syntax in Reading and Writing reflects this practical approach.

Having recently reviewed the following articles (over 60 at last count) and their accompanying FREE resources and lessons, I’m excited to share with you a teacher’s experience, opinions, research, and trial and error discoveries of what works to help students learn the fundamentals of our English language.

Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics

How to Eliminate “To-Be” Verbs in Writing

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-eliminate-to-be-verbs-in-writing/

Every English teacher has a sure-fire revision tip that makes developing writers dig down deep and revise initial drafts. One of my favorites involves eliminating the “to-be-verbs”: is, am, are, was, were, be, being, and been. Learn the four strategies to revise these “writing crutches.”

Why Daily Oral Language (D.O.L.) Doesn’t Work

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/why-daily-oral-language-d-o-l-doesnt-work/

Most teachers are familiar with Daily Oral Language, abbreviated as D.O.L. or under the guise of similar acronyms. Teachers like the canned program because it requires no teacher preparation, it provides “bell ringer” busy work so teachers can take attendance, and it seemingly “covers” the subjects of grammar, punctuation, capitalization, and spelling. D.O.L. is probably the most popular  instructional technique used to teach grammar. The second most often used technique would be the “teach no grammar-nor-mechanics technique” as is frequently employed by writing process purists who save this “instruction” until the last step of a process piece, if they ever get to it at all. However, the subject of this article is the latter technique, and why D.O.L. does not work.

Teaching Grammar and Mechanics Interactive Notebook

 

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/teaching-grammar-and-mechanics-interactive-notebook/

 

The Teaching Grammar and Mechanics Interactive Notebook Grades 4−8 programs will help your students master each of the Common Core grade-level grammar and mechanics Standards. This rigorous, fun, and easy-to-teach interactive notebook is neither a fact-filled collection of boring lecture notes, nor a time-wasting portfolio of art projects.

…

Daily Paragraph Editing

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/daily-paragraph-editing/

Evan-More’s Daily Editing is certainly an improvement over the publisher’s Daily Language Review or the popular Daily Oral Language (from many different publishers). The instructional scope and sequence of Daily Paragraph Editing is aligned to the Common Core State Standards and most other state Standards in grammar, usage, and mechanics. However, editing in the context of a paragraph does not solve the issue of teaching skills in isolation. Requiring a student to write a similar article is not the same as requiring students to apply specific skills learned in a lesson in the context of their own writing.

Squinting Modifiers

Squinting Modifiers

Dangling Modifiers

Dangling Modifiers

Misplaced Modifiers

Misplaced Modifiers

All Well and Good

All Well and Good

Pore or Pour

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/pour-or-pore-president-trump-tweet/

Superlative Modifiers

Superlative Modifiers

Comparative Modifiers

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/comparative-modifiers/

English Adjective Order

English Adjective Order

Don’t Teach Grammar Mini-Lessons

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/dont-teach-grammar-mini-lessons/

Drill and Kill Worksheets

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/reading/drill-and-kill-worksheets/

If you google “grammar worksheets,” you get 2,970,000 hits; if you google “vocabulary worksheets,” you get 8,250,000. Clearly more teachers other than Mr. Worksheet like their worksheets and see the value of deliberate, targeted, independent practice. Thought I’d dig into the educational research a bit to see whether what teachers say or what teachers do makes more sense.

Research-Based Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Worksheets

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/research-based-grammar-usage-and-mechanics-worksheets/

Not all worksheets are created alike. Worksheets need not “drill and kill” students to boredom or busy-work. Good teachers can spot a good worksheet when they see one. The educational research provides insight as to what makes a grammar, usage, and mechanics worksheet an effective instructional strategy for knowledge and/or skills acquisition. Check out the research-based grammar worksheets in this article.

Mechanics Scope and Sequence

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/mechanics-scope-and-sequence/

However, most all teachers support teaching some form of simple to complex instructional order in teaching mechanics. For example, students need to be able to define, identify, and apply simple abbreviations (Mr.) before learning acronyms (UNICEF) and initialisms (FBI). In other words, the simple academic language and mechanics instruction should precede the more complex. We have supportive (and recent–as of January 2016) educational research to validate this instructional order. Check out the grades 4-8 mechanics instructional sequence aligned to the Common Core State Standards.

Grammar Scope and Sequence 

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/grammar-scope-and-sequence/ 

Although the grammar debate* continues between 1.Those who favor part to whole (indirect, implicit, inductive) instruction and 2. Those who prefer whole to part (direct, explicit, deductive) instruction, both sides would generally agree that students should be able to define, identify, and use some things before other things. In other words, the simple academic language and grammatical instruction should precede the more complex. We have solid (and recent–January 2016) educational research to support this instructional sequence of instruction

Don’t Use Mad Libs to Teach Grammar

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/dont-use-mad-libs-to-teach-grammar/

Grammar Diagnostic Assessment and Recording Matrix

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/reading/pennington-publishing-elareading-assessments/

https://penningtonpublishing.com/assessments/Grammar%20Assessment%20Matrix.pdf

The TGM Grammar Diagnostic Assessment tests all of the basic grammar, parts of speech, and usage skills in an efficient multiple choice format. Students complete the assessment in 15-20 minutes. Record the data on the TGM Grammar Mastery Matrix and differentiate instruction according to student needs. Note: the Teaching Grammar and Mechanicscurriculum provides worksheets with formative assessments that correspond with each item on this assessment.

Mechanics Diagnostic Assessment and Recording Matrix

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/reading/pennington-publishing-elareading-assessments/

The TGM Mechanics Diagnostic Assessment is a whole class assessment that tests all of the basic punctuation and capitalization skills. Students complete the assessment in 10-15 minutes. Record the data on the TGM Mechanics Mastery Matrix and differentiate instruction according to student needs. Note: the Teaching Grammar and Mechanics curriculum provides worksheets with formative assessments that correspond with each item on this assessment.

How to Teach Conjunctions

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/conjunction-junction/

The old Schoolhouse Rock song poses the question: “Conjunction junction, what’s your function?” A clever rhyme, but the rest of the lyric provides little help to answer the question. Here’s the answer with some memory tricks to help your students remember and use the three types of conjunctions to add sentence variety to their writing.

How to Teach Grammar to Primary Students

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/reading/how-to-teach-grammar-to-primary-students/

For those of you primary teachers wondering how to teach the rigorous grammar, usage, mechanics, spelling, and vocabulary Standards… you are not alone. Check out how the sentence building exercises using sentence diagramming can make a difference for primary students.

How to Teach Writing Mechanics

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-teach-writing-mechanics/

“How to Teach Writing Mechanics” asks and provides possible answers to the What is (and isn’t) Writing Mechanics, Why Teach Writing Mechanics? When Should We Teach Writing Mechanics? What Writing Mechanics Should We Teach? How Should We Teach Writing Mechanics? How Much Class Time for Writing Mechanics? questions related to teaching the nuts and bolts of punctuation, capitalization, formatting, citations, quotations, etc. Check out and download the entire grades 4-8 mechanics instructional scope and sequence (completely aligned to the Common Core Language Strand Standards.

How to Teach English Grammar

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-teach-english-grammar/

“How to Teach English Grammar” asks and provides possible answers to the most pressing When, Why, How, What, and Whom questions related to teaching grammar. Check out and download the entire grades 4-8 grammar instructional scope and sequence (completely aligned to the Common Core Language Strand Standards.

Grammar Programs

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/grammar-programs/

Teachers frequently ask which Pennington Publishing grammar program will best meet the needs of their students. Of course most of us use grammar as a catch all term to mean parts of speech, syntax, usage, sentence structure, subjects and predicates, punctuation, quotation marks, and capitalization. For those teachers using the Common Core Standards, they are looking for materials to teach the Language Strand 1, 2, and 3 Standards.

Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/teaching-the-language-strand/

Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary is part of a comprehensive Grades 4-12 language program, designed to address each Standard in the Language Strand of the Common Core State Standards in 60-90 weekly instructional minutes. This full-year curriculum provides interactive grammar, usage, mechanics, and spelling lessons, a complete spelling patterns program, language application openers, and vocabulary instruction. The program has all the resources to meet the needs of diverse learners. Diagnostic assessments provide the data to enable teachers to individualize instruction with targeted worksheets, each with a formative assessment. Progress monitoring matrices allow teachers to track student progress. Each instructional resource is carefully designed to minimize teacher preparation, correction, and paperwork. Appendices have extensive instructional resources, including the Pennington Manual of Style and downloadable essay-comments. A student workbook accompanies this program.

Common Core Anchor Standards for Language

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/overview-of-the-common-core-language-strand/

English-language arts teachers have long been accustomed to the four-fold division of our “content” area into Reading, Writing, Listening, and Speaking. These divisions have been widely accepted and promoted by the NCTE, publishers, and other organizations. In a nod to the fearsome foursome, the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts maintains these divisions (now called strands)with two notable revisions: Speaking and Listening are combined and Language now has its own seat at the table. So who exactly is this new dinner guest? For those just beginning to explore the CCSS Language Strand, an overview may be helpful.

Common Core Grammar Standards

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/common-core-grammar-standards/

The Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts are divided into Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, and Language strands. The Common Core Grammar Standards are detailed in the Language Strand. It is notable that grammar and mechanics have their own strand, unlike the organization of many of the old state standards, which placed grammar and mechanics instruction solely within the confines of writing or speaking standards.

Of course, the writers of the Common Core use the ambiguous label, Language, to refer to what teachers and parents casually label as grammar and mechanics or conventions. To analyze content and educational philosophy of  the Common Core State Standards Language Strand, it may be helpful to examine What’s Good about the Common Core State Standards Language Strand? as well as What’s Bad about the Common Core State Standards Language Strand? chiefly from the words of the document itself.

CCSS Language Progressive Skills

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/ccss-language-progressive-skills-standards/

The Language Strand has been one of the most controversial components of the COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS & LITERACY IN HISTORY/SOCIAL STUDIES, SCIENCE, AND TECHNICAL SUBJECTS. One of these components stirring up heated debate has been the Language Progressive Skills document.

How to Teach Helping Verbs

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-teach-helping-verbs/

English teachers learn early in their careers that strong nouns and “show-me” verbs are the keys to good writing. Of these two keys, verbs give developing writers the most “bang for their buck” in terms of writing revision. As a plus, revising weak and imprecise verbs, such as helping verbs (also known as auxiliary verbs), with active “show-me verbs” is quite teachable and less vocabulary-dependent than working with nouns. Learn when to use and when not to use helping verbs and how to eliminate them to improve writing.

Why D.O.L. Does Not Transfer to Writing

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/why-d-o-l-does-not-transfer-to-writing/

Psychologists and educational theorists have developed learning theories to explain how new learning and skills are most efficiently mastered and best transfer to other academic activities. Let’s examine the most influential of these learning theories to explain why D.O.L. does not transfer to writing.

Problems with Daily Oral Language (D.O.L.)

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/problems-with-daily-oral-language-d-o-l/

Daily Oral Language is built upon oral review. Lack of instructional depth and the methodology of oral practice are key reasons why teachers complain that students do not retain the skills reviewed in Daily Oral Language (D.O.L.). After all, the reason we bother teaching mechanics, spelling, and grammar is to help students improve their writing.

Grammar and the Common Core

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/common-core-grammar-standards/

The Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts are divided into Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, and Language strands. The Common Core Grammar Standards are detailed in the Language Strand. It is notable that grammar and mechanics have their own strand, unlike the organization of many of the old state standards, which placed grammar and mechanics instruction solely within the confines of writing or speaking standards.

Of course, the writers of the Common Core use the ambiguous label, Language, to refer to what teachers and parents casually label as grammar and mechanics or conventions. To analyze content and educational philosophy of  the Common Core State Standards Language Strand, it may be helpful to examine What’s Good about the Common Core State Standards Language Strand? as well as What’s Bad about the Common Core State Standards Language Strand? chiefly from the words of the document itself.

Grammar Research and Balanced Instruction

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/grammar-research-and-balanced-instruction/

A balanced approach to grammatical instruction just makes the best sense of the grammar research. An approach that involves direct grammatical instruction in partnership with plenty of connected reading (sentence modeling) and writing (sentence manipulation). Here’s the summary of grammar research and practical instructional implications for teachers committed to differentiated instruction.

Why We Don’t Teach Grammar

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/six-reasons-why-we-don’t-teach-grammar/

Teachers de-emphasize grammar instruction for six key reasons. Learn these reasons and re-prioritize your instruction to include teaching grammar in the context of meaningful writing.

How to Teach Grammar

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-teach-grammar/

Within the field of English-language arts, there is probably no more contentious curricular issue than that of how to teach grammar. The “Reading Wars” and “Writing Wars” get all the press, but teachers are much more unified in their teaching philosophy and instructional practice in those areas than they are with grammar. Here are 21 assumptions about grammatical instruction and four simple steps to teach grammar, mechanics, and spelling to your students.

The Great Grammar Debate

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/the-great-grammar-debate/

The Great Grammar Debate between those favoring part to whole and those favoring whole to part grammar instruction is still relevant.

Teach Grammar through Writing 

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-integrate-grammar-and-writing-instruction/

Balanced grammar instruction includes four components: 1. Differentiated instruction based upon diagnostic assessments 2. Direct instruction in grammar and mechanics 3. Writing strategies practice and 4. Writing process revision and editing.

How to Identify Subjects and Predicates

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com//blog/grammar_mechanics/how-to-identify-subjects-and-predicates-2/

The complete sentence is, undoubtedly, the most important benchmark of conventional writing. Subjects and predicates are the best identifiers of the complete sentence and the best checks to identify sentence fragments and run-ons. This article helps students to identify sentence subjects and predicates with clear definitions and examples.

How to Fix Sentence Fragments

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-fix-sentence-fragments/

Writing in complete sentences is the essential writing skill. Even sophisticated writers sometimes struggle with sentence fragments. Learn how to identify sentence fragments in your own writing and, more importantly, fix these to create mature and complete sentences.

How to Fix Run-On Sentences

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-fix-run-on-sentences/

Writing in complete sentences is the essential writing skill. Even sophisticated writers sometimes struggle with run-on sentences. Learn how to identify run-ons in your own writing and, more importantly, fix these to create mature and complete sentences.

Grammar Instruction: Establishing Common Ground

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/grammar-instruction-establishing-common-ground/

Perhaps no instructional issue in English-language arts produces more contentious debate than the issue of how best to teach grammar. All too often we bog down in our discussion over the issue of instructional strategies. Perhaps a more useful starting point for our discussion would be to come to consensus about what we expect students to know and when. Establishing a common ground on this issue can help us determine what to diagnostically assess in order to determine our students’ relative strengths and weaknesses.

Top 40 Grammar Pet Peeves

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/top-40-grammar-pet-peeves/

Here is the list of the Top 40 Grammar Pet Peeves that irritate most Americans. Learn what’s wrong, what’s write, and the tips to avoid these common grammatical mistakes.

The Parts of Speech Song

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/parts-of-speech-song/

Students love to rap with the parts of speech. The key definitions are included in concise form. An MP3 file makes it easy to teach and learn.

The Ten Parts of Speech with Clear Examples

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/the-ten-parts-of-speech-with-clear-examples/

Knowing the parts of speech is key to the grammatical language of instruction. Writers need to be able to accurately identify and apply each of these ten parts of speech. This concise reference clearly defines all ten parts of speech and provides clear examples of each.

The Most Useful Punctuation and Capitalization Rules

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/the-most-useful-punctuation-and-capitalization-rules/

Proper punctuation and capitalization are marks of an educated and careful writer. Here is everything you need to know about proper punctuation and capitalization in one concise reference. Clear examples make this tool a must for every writer.

How to Teach Verbs

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-teach-verbs/

Time to ditch ineffective Daily Oral Language (DOL)! Learn an instructional approach that teaches adverbs in the context of writing and reading. Review an instructional scope and sequence for teaching verbs that makes sense. Get all the definitions, examples, and writing style resources for how to teach verbs in easy-to-understand language. And check out the cool verbs cartoon.

How and When to Teach Adjectives

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-and-when-to-teach-adjectives/

Time to ditch ineffective Daily Oral Language (DOL)! Learn an instructional approach that teaches adjectives in the context of writing and reading. Review an instructional scope and sequence for teaching adjectives from primary elementary to high school. Get all the definitions, examples, and writing style resources re: how to teach adjectives in easy-to-understand language. And check out the cool adjectives cartoon.

How and When to Teach Pronouns

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-and-when-to-teach-pronouns/

Time to ditch ineffective Daily Oral Language (DOL)! Learn an instructional approach that teaches pronouns in the context of writing and reading. Review an instructional scope and sequence for teaching pronouns from primary elementary to high school. Get all the pronoun definitions, examples, and writing style resources in easy-to-understand language. And check out the cool pronouns cartoon.

How and When to Teach Nouns

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-and-when-to-teach-nouns/

Time to ditch ineffective Daily Oral Language (DOL)! Learn an instructional approach that teaches nouns in the context of writing and reading. Review an instructional scope and sequence for teaching nouns from primary elementary to high school. Get all the noun definitions, examples, and writing style resources in easy-to-understand language. And check out the cool nouns cartoon.

How and When to Teach Adverbs

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-and-when-to-teach-adverbs/

Time to ditch ineffective Daily Oral Language (DOL)! Learn an instructional approach that teaches adverbs in the context of writing and reading. Review an instructional scope and sequence for teaching adverbs from primary elementary to high school. Most importantly, get adverbial definitions, examples, and writing style resources in easy-to-understand language. And check out the cool adverbs cartoon.

How to Teach Conjunctions

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-teach-conjunctions/

“Conjunction junction, what’s your function?” Time to ditch ineffective Daily Oral Language (DOL)! Learn an instructional approach that teaches conjunctions in the context of writing and reading. Get all the conjunction definitions, examples, and writing style resources in easy-to-understand language. And check out the cool conjunctions cartoon.

How to Teach Prepositional Phrases

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-teach-prepositional-phrases/

Wouldn’t it make sense to spend instructional time on the part of speech that constitutes 30% of all writing? Prepositional phrases are used that much. Time to ditch ineffective Daily Oral Language (DOL)! Learn an instructional approach that teaches prepositional phrases in the context of writing and reading. Get all the preposition definitions, examples, and writing style resources in easy-to-understand language. And check out the cool prepositions cartoon.

Mechanics Quiz for Teachers

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/mechanics-quiz-for-teachers/

See how much you know about mechanics (commas, capitalization, quotation marks, colons, apostrophes, semicolons, punctuation, etc.) by taking the 10 Question Mechanics Quiz for Teachers. Don’t worry; I’ll dispense with the usual “If you score 9 or 10 out of 10, you are…” Let’s keep things fun!

Grammar Quiz for Teachers

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/grammar-quiz-for-teachers/

See how much you know about grammar by taking the 10 Question Grammar Quiz for Teachers. Don’t worry; I’ll dispense with the usual “If you score 9 or 10 out of 10, you are…” Let’s keep things fun!

Knowledge of Language | Anchor Standards for Language

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/knowledge-of-language-anchor-standards-for-language/

Tucked away in the often-overlooked recesses of the Common Core State Standards, the Anchor Standards for Language includes a practical, if somewhat ambiguous Standard: Knowledge of Language L.3. Over the past decade, I’ve noted with interest that the educational community has cherry-picked certain Standards and ignored others. Get free sample lessons from Pennington Publishing’s Writing Openers Language Application (Grades 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8).

Grammar | Teaching in the Social Context

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/grammar-teaching-in-the-social-context/

If we consider the traditional four communicative contexts of English-language arts (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) and add on a fifth, the visual context, thanks to the interesting research of Kress and van Leeuwen, we find that language never takes place in isolation. Even when my wife talks to herself, she does have an audience (and I’m rarely included). A few examples (with good instructional links and the related Common Core Standards) will remind us of how we teach the language interactively:

Literacy centers provide an ideal social context for cooperative learning about grammar: parts of speech, syntax and sentence structure, standard and non-standard usage, word choice, dialect, punctuation, capitalization, etc. Now, of course your students need the right tools. We can’t have the blind leading the blind.

How about a few interactive grammar lessons to test-drive with your students in a cooperative group or literacy center? Your download includes four grammar and mechanics lessons, the unit test (with answers), directions, and literacy center leadership roles.

How to Teach Interactive Grammar

https://blog.penningtonpublishing.com/grammar_mechanics/how-to-teach-interactive-grammar/

How about a few interactive grammar lessons to test-drive with your students? Your download includes four grammar and mechanics lessons, the unit test (with answers), directions, and literacy center leadership roles.

*****

Teaching Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics (Grades 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and High School) are full-year, traditional, grade-level grammar, usage, and mechanics programs with plenty of remedial practice to help students catch up while they keep up with grade-level standards. Twice-per-week, 30-minute, no prep lessons in print or interactive Google slides with a fun secret agent theme. Simple sentence diagrams, mentor texts, video lessons, sentence dictations. Plenty of practice in the writing context. Includes biweekly tests and a final exam.

Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Interactive Notebook (Grades 4‒8) is a full-year, no prep interactive notebook without all the mess. Twice-per-week, 30-minute, no prep grammar, usage, and mechanics lessons, formatted in Cornell Notes with cartoon response, writing application, 3D graphic organizers (easy cut and paste foldables), and great resource links. No need to create a teacher INB for student make-up work—it’s done for you! Plus, get remedial worksheets, biweekly tests, and a final exam.

Syntax in Reading and Writing is a function-based, sentence-level syntax program, designed to build reading comprehension and increase writing sophistication. The 18 parts of speech, phrases, and clauses lessons are each leveled from basic (elementary) to advanced (middle and high school) and feature 5 lesson components (10–15 minutes each): 1. Learn It!  2. Identify It!  3. Explain It! (analysis of challenging sentences) 4. Revise It! (kernel sentences, sentence expansion, syntactic manipulation) 5. Create It! (Short writing application with the syntactic focus in different genre).

Get the Diagnostic Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Assessments, Matrix, and Final Exam FREE Resource:

More Articles, Free Resources, and Teaching Tips from the Pennington Publishing Blog

Bookmark and check back often for new articles and free ELA/reading resources from Pennington Publishing.

• Free Teaching Reading Resources
• Grammar and Mechanics
• Vocabulary
• English-language Arts Standards
• English-language Arts Instruction
• Essay Resources and Lessons
• The Writing Process/Writers Workshop
• Writing Style
• Spelling
• Structural Analysis/Syllabication/Oral Language
• ELA/Reading Assessments
• Independent Reading
• Reading Intervention (RtI Resources)
• EL/ESL/ELD
• Assessment-based Individualized Instruction/Differentiated Instruction
• Critical Thinking
• Study Skills
• Test Preparation
• Developmental Characteristics
• Professional Development
• Literacy Centers
• Close Reading
• Reading Comprehension

*****

*****

Pennington Publishing’s mission is to provide the finest in assessment-based ELA and reading intervention resources for grades 4‒high school teachers. Mark Pennington is the author of many printable and digital programs. Please check out Pennington Publishing for assessment-based resources created for teachers by a fellow teacher.

Grammar/Mechanics, Literacy Centers, Study Skills, Writing adjectives, adverbs, commas, complete sentences, conjunctions, direct grammar instruction, DOL, English grammar, free DOL, grammar, grammar and writing, grammar book, grammar curriculum, grammar openers, grammar programs, grammar resources, grammar terms, grammar worksheets, grammatical sentence openers, how to teach grammar, interjections, Mark Pennington, mechanics, mechanics worksheets, nouns, parts of speech, parts of speech worksheets, pennington publishing, prepositions, pronouns, sentence lifting, teacher worksheets, teaching grammar, Teaching the Language Strand, to be verbs, verbs

A growing body of research presents a challenge to current K-12 reading/English-language Arts instruction. In essence, we need to “up” the level of text complexity and provide greater opportunities for independent reading. The Common Core State English-language Arts Standards provides a convincing three-reason argument in support of these changes in instructional practice. Following this rationale, I will share ten instructional implications and address a few possible objections.

1. Text complexity is the most important variable in reading comprehension. The level of difficulty is a more important variable in reading comprehension than is a reader’s degree of mastery of inferential reading strategies or critical thinking skills. In other words, what you read is more of an issue than how you read. Now applying reading strategies and critical thinking skills can certainly scaffold a reader’s ability to comprehend difficult text, but vocabulary, text organization, and sentence length seem to be more crucial variables.

From the Common Core State English-language Arts Standards Appendix A…

In 2006, ACT, Inc., released a report called Reading Between the Lines that showed which skills differentiated those students who equaled or exceeded the benchmark score (21 out of 36) in the reading section of the ACT college admissions test from those who did not. Prior ACT research had shown that students achieving the benchmark score or better in reading—which only about half (51 percent) of the roughly half million test takers in the 2004–2005 academic year had done—had a high probability (75 percent chance) of earning a C or better in an introductory, credit-bearing course in U.S. history or psychology (two common reading-intensive courses taken by first-year college students) and a 50 percent chance of earning a B or better in such a course.

Surprisingly, what chiefly distinguished the performance of those students who had earned the benchmark score or better from those who had not was not their relative ability in making inferences while reading or answering questions related to particular cognitive processes, such as determining main ideas or determining the meaning of words and phrases in context. Instead, the clearest differentiator was students’ ability to answer questions associated with complex texts. Students scoring below benchmark performed no better than chance (25 percent correct) on four-option multiple-choice questions pertaining to passages rated as “complex” on a three-point qualitative rubric described in the report. These findings held for male and female students, students from all racial/ethnic groups, and students from families with widely varying incomes.

2. Post K-12 text complexity in college, the workplace, and in popular media has remained constant or increased in terms of levels of difficulty over the last fifty years.

From the Common Core State English-language Arts Standards Appendix A…

Research indicates that the demands that college, careers, and citizenship place on readers have either held steady or increased over roughly the last fifty years. The difficulty of college textbooks, as measured by Lexile scores, has not decreased in any block of time since 1962; it has, in fact, increased over that period (Stenner, Koons, & Swartz, in press). The word difficulty of every scientific journal and magazine from 1930 to 1990 examined by Hayes and Ward (1992) had actually increased, which is important in part because, as a 2005 College Board study (Milewski, Johnson, Glazer, & Kubota, 2005) found, college professors assign more readings from periodicals than do high school teachers. Workplace reading, measured in Lexiles, exceeds grade 12 complexity significantly, although there is considerable variation (Stenner, Koons, & Swartz, in press). The vocabulary difficulty of newspapers remained stable over the 1963–1991 period Hayes and his colleagues (Hayes, Wolfer, & Wolfe, 1996) studied.

3. K-12 text complexity has declined over the last fifty years.

From the Common Core State English-language Arts Standards Appendix A…

Despite steady or growing reading demands from various sources, K–12 reading texts have actually trended downward in difficulty in the last half century. Jeanne Chall and her colleagues (Chall, Conard, & Harris, 1977) found a thirteen year decrease from 1963 to 1975 in the difficulty of grade 1, grade 6, and (especially) grade 11 texts. Extending the period to 1991, Hayes, Wolfer, and Wolfe (1996) found precipitous declines (relative to the period from 1946 to 1962) in average sentence length and vocabulary level in reading textbooks for a variety of grades… Carrying the research closer to the present day, Gary L. Williamson (2006) found a 350L (Lexile) gap between the difficulty of end-of-high school and college texts—a gap equivalent to 1.5 standard deviations and more than the Lexile difference between grade 4 and grade 8 texts on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

http://www.corestandards.org/

Ten Implications for K-12 Instruction

1. Higher Expectations

Clearly, we teachers need to “up” the level of difficulty of text and provide the scaffolds students need to understand that text. We need to challenge our students to struggle a bit. We can’t focus all of our instruction on the lowest common denominators.

2. Vocabulary

We need to use a systematic approach to vocabulary instruction including teaching structural analysis, context clues, and rote memorization and practice in what Isabel Beck calls “Tier Two” words that have high utility and applicability in academic language. Our students have got to master frequently used Greek and Latin affixes and roots.

3. Sentence and Text Structure

We need to not only analyze sentence and text structure, but also practice variations and complexities in our students’ writing. Good writers are better equipped to understand the complexities of how ideas are presented in academic text. The reading-writing connection is teachable.

4. Content

We need to teach the prior knowledge that students need to access difficult text independently. And we need to share and coordinate the load with our colleagues. For example, are our novels, poetry, and writing assignments aligned with what our students are learning in their history classes? We need to work smarter, not harder.

5. Reading Strategies

We need to be both content and process-driven. If we do not provide the tools and practice for our students, “reading to learn” will never work. Our elementary colleagues have largely handled the “learning to read,” but we need to apply the basic to the complex.

6. Critical Thinking

We need to teach the elements of logic and higher order thinking are prerequisites to understanding difficult reading text. Recognizing both solid and fallacious reasoning is an essential reading skill.

7. Expository Text

We need to put aside our exclusive love of literature and poetry for the sake of our students. College, workplace, and popular media texts are overwhelmingly expository in nature. We can do both.

8. Novel Selection

We may need to let go of traditional novels. Let’s take a hard look at what we are teaching to maximize content and process instruction. For example, Reading Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry may cover the content and standards nicely for an eighth grade ELA class, but the largely fifth grade reading level does not provide the text complexity that our students need. Additionally, shorter novels, selections, poems, articles, etc. will do the job more efficiently and with greater variety.

9. Differentiated Instruction

We need to recognize that all of students simply do not read at the same levels. Students have  different reading issues that inhibit their abilities to comprehend challenging text. We have to find out who has what issues and adjust our instruction accordingly. It does no good to play the “blame game” on previous teachers. We teach standards, but we also teach students. Diagnostic reading assessment has got to be a given for the conscientious reading/ELA teacher.

10. Independent Reading

We need to stop being co-dependents. The Common Core emphasis on CLOSE READING STRATEGIES can can be overdone. We do have to transfer the demands of accessing text over to students at some point. Plus, we need to fight the hard fight and require students to read at home. The amount of independent reading needed to increase even one grade level in terms of reading comprehension and vocabulary development necessitates reading at home.

Possible Objections and Howevers

We can certainly question the adequacy and accuracy of the tools used to measure text complexity. However, we all know that our students’ biology textbooks are more difficult than the Manga and Twilight that are students are reading.

What about the joy of reading? We want to create lifelong readers, not factory-trained automatons for the needs of academia, the workplace, and popular media. Reading trash can be entertaining. However, text complexity does not preclude reading for fun. The ability to read and understand more complex text should expand and enhance that experience.

What we teach in K-12 is in-it-of-itself valuable and relevant to the needs of our students. It may also be foundational in terms of content and process for greater text complexity. We are not just training students for future college, careers, and citizenship; we are teaching students now. However, can’t we have our cake and eat it, too? If our students need to know about chimpanzee behavior, can’t we replace Curious George with a scientific journal?

Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary Common Core Standards, Common Core State ELA Standards, Common Core State English Standards, Common Core State Standards, Common Core State Writing Standards, ELA, ELA in-service, ELA standards, English curriculum, English grammar, English standards, English-language arts, English-language Arts standards, grammar standards, how to teach ELA standards, independent reading, independent reading levels, lexiles, listening and speaking standards, Mark Pennington, mechanics, national ELA standards, national standards, race to the top, readability, reading comprehension, reading standards, reading strategies, response to intervention, RTI, standards-based, teaching English, teaching literature, text difficulty, vocabulary standards, writing standards

Teacher burn-out is real. We begin with high expectations of ourselves and idealism; however, after a few years the drudgery sets in. ELA teachers seem to burn-out more often than their colleagues in other disciplines. What causes burn-out and how can we work through this phase in our teaching careers?

None of us gets into the teaching profession with the hopes of being mediocre. All ELA/reading teachers want to do their best for their students. But how can we give our best when so many impediments stand in our way? I’m not talking about the usual ones we discuss in the staff room: discipline problems, overbearing administrators, bothersome parents, lack of materials. I’m talking about the all of the stuff that reductively minimizes our opportunity to be our best. In other words, if we could just rid ourselves (and our students) of… XXXX, we could truly be the teachers we want to be. So, let’s explore the impediments many ELA/reading teachers that keep us from teaching how and what we need to teach, the solutions as to how to reduce or get rid of these in our teaching repertoire, and most importantly what to teach now that the impediments have been removed.

10 Causes of ELA Teacher Burn-out and Solutions

1. Standards

Impediments: Although most teachers support the notion of an instructional scope and sequence, district-state-national standards were not delivered at Mt. Sinai. Some ELA/reading standards are more important than others and we ultimately and practically teach our students, not the standards. Our students are an unruly lot, refusing to progress at exactly the same rates and generally making a mess of our year-to-year academic standards.

Solutions: Establish priorities in terms of instructional time. Does anyone think that an identifying author’s purpose standard merits the same amount of attention as a reading comprehension standard? Develop a balance between teaching grade-level and review standards, according to the needs of your students indicated by diagnostic data.

2. School Culture and Interruptions

Impediments: At the middle or high school level, the ELA classes check out all books in the library, get student identification pictures, get picture re-takes, listen to counselor career presentations, and attend discipline assemblies. Daily announcements, spirit assemblies, guest speakers, phone calls interrupt all teachers. Not to mention the usual bathroom/counselor/nurse passes.

Solutions: Be assertive and learn to say “No.” Get other colleagues on board, work through the appropriate channels, and be willing to compromise; but guard “time on task” and re-visit these impediments regularly—they have a habit of sneaking back in.

3. Traditions

Impediments: 3^rd grade silkworms and the reading incentive program, 4^th grade dioramas and animal reports, 5^th grade sugar cube castles and state reports, 6^th grade science projects and PowerPoint® presentations, 7^th grade African masks and oral reports, Martin Luther King, Jr. essay contest and 8^th grade U.S. Constitution graduation requirement. You get the idea.

Solutions: Develop the mindset that any instructional activity that can achieve the same objectives in a more efficient manner than another instructional activity should be the one you choose. Don’t confuse content and process objectives.

4. Colleagues

Impediments: “We all teach XXXX. It’s a team decision—there is no I in team.” Disagreement is perceived as personal attack. Gossip, friendship, even romance. And colleagues tend to prey upon our good natures to get us to follow their agendas.

Solutions: Affirm your colleagues’ agendas, but don’t get sucked in. Always run a cost-benefit analysis when changing instruction. Being a team player doesn’t mean sacrificing your autonomy. Do what makes sense for you and your students.

5. Scheduling

Impediments: Advanced band is only offered this period, the special education pull-out study skills program, the reading intervention program, the remedial-basic-advanced-honors ELA classes, and the computer lab. And others.

Solutions: The needs of the students should dictate schedules; however, well-intended interventions, pull-out programs, and tracking can reduce the amount of core instructional time each student receives and/or change a teacher’s instructional plans. Insist upon differentiating instruction within the scope of the core ELA curricula and the confines of the regular classroom to address student needs.

6. Pigeonholing

Impediments: Shouldn’t the ELA teachers teach XXXX? Reading (literature and reading skills and SSR), writing, listening, speaking. Note-taking. Critical thinking. Problem-solving skills. Study skills. Career exploration. And let’s add on basic parenting.

Solutions: Preach “all teachers are teachers of reading, writing, and thinking.” Get to know the process-oriented standards of your math, social studies, arts, foreign language, physical education, and science teachers for ammunition and encourage everyone to share the load.

7. Educational Fads

Impediments: Learning styles, rigor and relevance, multiple intelligences, small learning communities, tribes, Cornell notes, reading fads, levels of questioning. And a few hundred more.

Solutions: Before jumping onto bandwagons, talk to veteran teachers for their “what comes around, goes around” perspectives, search the Internet for the real research on any educational fad, and take all professors’ and presenters’ information with grains of salt. Stick to the basics when in doubt.

8. Bureaucracy and Paperwork

Impediments: Progress monitoring charts, skills documentation, reading logs, independent learning goals, student evaluations. Staff meetings. Department meetings. Grade-level team meetings. Cross-disciplinary meetings. Vertical articulation. The mind boggles.

Solutions: Veteran teachers know how to cut corners when they need cutting. Ask them. Insist upon written agendas with time allocations and a time-keeper for meetings. Push to get everything in writing that can be written on an agenda and e-mailed in advance. Hold colleagues accountable for “birdwalking.” Keep business meetings all-business, and schedule personal hang-out/discussion time prior to or after meetings.

9. Testing

Impediments: State testing, district testing, diagnostic assessments, formative assessments, summative assessments. Standardized test preparation. Unit test review.

Solutions: Select colleagues committed to protecting teacher instructional time as district representatives on testing committees. Minimize isolated test preparation. The best test preparation is good teaching in the core ELA instructional components.

10. Ourselves

Impediments: I love to share my personal life with my students. My students love my stories. My students love my jokes. I just enjoy talking with students. I go with the “teachable moments.” I teach more of this because I like it better. I hate teaching, never liked, or I’m bad at XXXX… so I don’t teach it.

Solutions: We are often our own worst enemies. Ask a trusted colleague to observe you, your personal idiosyncrasies, and how you waste instructional time. Video-tape yourself. Don’t confuse your own teaching style with poor time management. Teach all the core curricular components and work on those in which you are weak.

Instructional Priorities

There are curricular priorities that most ELA teachers would agree to teach “if only they had the time.” To be practical as possible, here are the specific “Big Six” ELA instructional components with percentages of instructional time that make sense to allocate to each. Having taught at the upper elementary, middle school, high school, and community college levels, I believe that the core instructional components and allocations of instructional time should remain constant across those levels. Take stock of what you teach and how much time you allocate to each instructional component. And feel free to disagree.

The Big Six

1. Word Study (Vocabulary and Spelling) 16%

2. Grammar and Mechanics 16%

3. Reading Strategies 16%

4. Literary Analysis 16%

5, Writing Strategies 16%

6. Writing Process Papers 16%

That leaves 4% for the impediments that you cannot remove. Such is life.

*****

I’m Mark Pennington, author of the full-year interactive grammar notebooks,  grammar literacy centers, the traditional grade-level 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and high school Teaching Grammar and Mechanics programs, and the value-packed Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary BUNDLES.

Teaching Grammar and Mechanics includes 56 (64 for high school) interactive language conventions lessons,  designed for twice-per-week direct instruction in the grade-level grammar, usage, and mechanics standards. The scripted lessons (perfect for the grammatically-challenged teacher) are formatted for classroom display. Standards review, definitions and examples, practice and error analysis, simple sentence diagrams, mentor texts with writing applications, and formative assessments are woven into every 25-minute lesson. The program also includes the Diagnostic Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Assessments with corresponding worksheets to help students catch up, while they keep up with grade-level, standards-aligned instruction.

Here’s a great example of how to manage time and avoid teacher-burn out with this full-year grammar and mechanics instructional plan:

Get the Grammar and Mechanics Grades 4-8 Instructional Scope and Sequence FREE Resource:

Grammar/Mechanics, Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills, Writing ELA, ELA in-service, ELA instruction, ELA scope and sequence, ELA standards, ELA teaching tips, ELA time management, English curriculum, English grammar, English standards, English-language arts, English-language Arts standards, grammar, grammar standards, how to teach ELA standards, listening and speaking standards, Mark Pennington, mechanics, national ELA standards, national standards, reading standards, RTI, standards-based, teacher burn-out, teaching English, teaching literature, Teaching Reading Strategies, teaching spelling, vocabulary standards, word analysis, word study, writing standards, writing strategies

• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM uses “themed” spelling word lists, grouping words by such themes as animals, months, or colors. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM uses developmental spelling patterns for its word lists, providing sequential, research-based orthographic instruction.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM uses practice worksheets that focus on rote memorization, such as word searches, fill-in-the-blanks, or crossword puzzles. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM provides spelling sorts/word parts worksheets to help students practice recognition and application of the spelling patterns.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM de-emphasizes structural analysis. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM emphasizes word study: syllables, accents, morphemes, inflections, spelling rules, pronunciation, and derivational influences.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM does not integrate vocabulary instruction. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM integrates homonyms, common Greek and Latin prefixes, roots, and suffixes, and other linguistic influences.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM minimizes the reading-spelling connection. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM reinforces the decoding-encoding connection with an instructional scope and sequence aligned with systematic phonics instruction. The A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM program includes five years of seamless spelling instruction (Levels A, B, C, D, E)—perfect for grade-level classes, combination classes, and flexible homeschool instruction.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM ignores spelling irregularities. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM includes “rule-breakers” throughout the program, providing problem-solving strategies that build student (and teacher) confidence in the English orthographic spelling system.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM uses spelling tests solely as summative assessments. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM uses spelling tests as diagnostic and formative instruments to help teachers differentiate instruction. Recording matrices enable teachers to keep track of mastered and un-mastered spelling patterns for each student—simple record-keeping and minimal paperwork.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM provides one-size fits all instruction. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM provides the resources for true differentiated instruction from remedial to grade-level to accelerated spellers.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM uses visual-only spelling strategies. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM uses multi-sensory instructional practice, including songs, raps, games and phonological awareness activities—perfect for students with auditory processing deficits and a “must” for effective Response to Intervention (RTI) instruction.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM has no writing-spelling connection. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM requires students to develop weekly Personal Spelling Lists that include commonly misspelled words from their own writing.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM provides no review activities for unit spelling tests. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM provides ample review activities, including Word Jumbles for each sound-spelling pattern, web-based songs and raps, and entertaining games.
• A BAD SPELLING PROGRAM takes either inordinate teacher preparation or require too much class time. A GOOD SPELLING PROGRAM is “teacher-friendly” and requires only minimal prep time. These flexible resources will not eat up instructional minutes.

A Model Grades 3-8 Spelling Scope and Sequence

Preview the Grades 3-8 Spelling Scope and Sequence tied to the author’s comprehensive grades 3-8 Language Strand programs. The instructional scope and sequence includes grammar, usage, mechanics, spelling, and vocabulary. Teachers and district personnel are authorized to print and share this planning tool, with proper credit and/or citation. Why reinvent the wheel? Also check out my articles on Grammar Scope and Sequence, Mechanics Scope and Sequence, and Vocabulary Scope and Sequence.

FREE DOWNLOAD TO ASSESS THE QUALITY OF PENNINGTON PUBLISHING AMERICAN ENGLISH AND CANADIAN ENGLISH SPELLING PROGRAMS. Check out these grades 3-8 programs HERE. Administer my FREE comprehensive Diagnostic Spelling Assessment with audio file and recording matrix. It has 102 words (I did say comprehensive) and covers all common spelling patterns and conventional spelling rules. It only takes 22 minutes and includes an audio file with test administration instructions. Once you see the gaps in your students’ spelling patterns, you’re going to want to fill those gaps.

Get the Diagnostic Spelling Assessment, Mastery Matrix, and Sample Lessons FREE Resource:

 

Literacy Centers, Reading, Spelling/Vocabulary, Study Skills bad spelling programs, conventions, English spelling, evaluating spelling programs, good spelling programs, grammar, Mark Pennington, mechanics, spelling, spelling and writing, spelling programs, spelling rules

Perhaps no instructional issue in English-language arts produces more contentious debate than the issue of how best to teach grammar. When most of us refer to grammar we mean the structure of the sentence, the components of the sentence, word choice, the order of words, style, and usage. Some will also include punctuation, capitalization and even, perhaps spelling in the grammar stew.

All too often we bog down in our discussion over the issue of instructional strategies. Should we teach these skills explicitly through direct instruction? Should we teach these skills implicitly at the point of student need? Should we teach these skills in isolation? Should we teach these skills in the context of writing? What are the most efficient and effective means of instruction? Which instructional strategies produce the most retention? How can we differentiate instruction?

It may be that we begin, but quickly end the discussion of how to teach grammar because in posing these questions we are placing the “cart before the horse.” Perhaps a more useful starting point for our discussion would be to come to consensus about what we expect students to know and when. Establishing a common ground on this issue can help us determine what to diagnostically assess in order to determine our students’ relative strengths and weaknesses. Only at this point does it make sense to discuss the instructional strategies that will address the needs of our students.

This goal of consensus can be easier said than done. Teachers are inherently protective of their own instructional sovereignty. We all enter teaching to be “queens and kings of our own castles.” We are, by nature, independent thinkers. Collaboration requires some levels of releasing that sovereignty and replacing some of that independence with dependence. Additionally, we are all afraid of exposing our deficiencies. Many of us have received little grammar instruction and less training in how to teach the skills outlined above. Colleagues can be intimidating. It’s hard to admit our weaknesses. Much easier to keep our ostrich heads in the sand regarding grammar and focus our efforts on what we do know.

However, for the sake of our students we need to acknowledge our “elephants” in the room and begin to trust our colleagues. A climate of collaboration can be nurtured among teaching professionals. This risk-taking climate takes time and requires sensitive leadership. Group norms need to be established and practiced to ensure success. But, the results will be worth the efforts.

What Should Students Know and When?

At first blush, teachers will latch onto to Common Core Language Strand Standards. Fine as a starting point and undoubtedly more rigorous than previous state standards which tended to emphasize grammar, usage, and mechanics instruction only in the writing context; however, standards only offer a basic blueprint for grammatical instruction. The devil is in the details. Defining these issues in meaningful ways that will impact both instruction and learning necessitates detailed conversations. We need to get specific.

It makes sense to establish a set of skills and expectations to be mastered at each grade level. Defining a specific year-to-year instructional scope and sequence (the Common Core Standards are far too generic) with colleagues provides a game plan and also defines the content for assessment. See the following author tag for a comprehensive instructional scope and sequence for Grades 4-8. These skills and expectations need to be hammered out in the context of vertical teaming and articulation. The complexity of English grammar and the recursive nature of grammatical instruction necessitate grade-to-grade level discussion and consensus-building.

At my middle school, we began the conversation with seventh and eighth grade teams. We then got release time to meet with our elementary and high school colleagues. We began the process of building a scope and sequence to help us move students from Point A to Point B to Point C. Our goals were to adopt a common academic language, establish grade-level expectations, and build in review to address the recursive nature of grammatical instruction. We found much more common ground on these goals than many of us had expected, especially because we have not addressed instructional strategies at this point of the conversation.

How Do We Know What They Know and Do Not Know?

Having agreed to 72 skills and expectations for our middle schoolers in our comprehensive instructional scope and sequence, we then began designing diagnostic assessments to inform our grammatical instruction. Our criteria for the diagnostic assessments included the following: The assessments must specifically focus on the 72 “common ground” components of our instructional scope and sequence. The assessments must be whole-class, easy-to-administer, easy-to-grade, and easy-to-record. The assessment components should be “teachable.” One such set of diagnostic assessments, based upon 72 “common ground issues” that we are using as starting points are my own multiple-choice Grammar and Mechanics Assessments.

Where Do We Go from Here?

Having established what students need to know and when, and having developed diagnostic assessments to determine what students do and do not know, the real fun begins. At this point, we are beginning the process of sharing the instructional strategies that seem to best meet the needs of our students. Explicit or implicit instructional strategies? How can we establish benchmarks to formatively assess skill acquisition?  How can we differentiate instruction, according to the results of our assessments?

*****

Teaching Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics (Grades 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and High School) are full-year, traditional, grade-level grammar, usage, and mechanics programs with plenty of remedial practice to help students catch up while they keep up with grade-level standards. Twice-per-week, 30-minute, no prep lessons in print or interactive Google slides with a fun secret agent theme. Simple sentence diagrams, mentor texts, video lessons, sentence dictations. Plenty of practice in the writing context. Includes biweekly tests and a final exam.

Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Interactive Notebook (Grades 4‒8) is a full-year, no prep interactive notebook without all the mess. Twice-per-week, 30-minute, no prep grammar, usage, and mechanics lessons, formatted in Cornell Notes with cartoon response, writing application, 3D graphic organizers (easy cut and paste foldables), and great resource links. No need to create a teacher INB for student make-up work—it’s done for you! Plus, get remedial worksheets, biweekly tests, and a final exam.

Syntax in Reading and Writing is a function-based, sentence-level syntax program, designed to build reading comprehension and increase writing sophistication. The 18 parts of speech, phrases, and clauses lessons are each leveled from basic (elementary) to advanced (middle and high school) and feature 5 lesson components (10–15 minutes each): 1. Learn It!  2. Identify It!  3. Explain It! (analysis of challenging sentences) 4. Revise It! (kernel sentences, sentence expansion, syntactic manipulation) 5. Create It! (Short writing application with the syntactic focus in different genre).

Get the Diagnostic Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Assessments, Matrix, and Final Exam FREE Resource:

Grammar/Mechanics, Literacy Centers, Study Skills, Writing D.O.L., daily oral language, English grammar, explicit grammar, grammar scope and sequence, grammar standards, grammar worksheets, how to teach grammar, implicit grammar, Mark Pennington, mechanics, parts of speech, punctuation, teaching grammar, Teaching the Language Strand, vertical teaming, writing standards

Within the field of English-language arts, there is probably no more contentious curricular issue than that of how to teach grammar. The “Reading Wars” and “Writing Wars” get all the press, but teachers are much more unified in their teaching philosophy and instructional practice in those areas, than they are with respect to “The Great Grammar Debate.”

Even those who have decried the direct instruction of grammar believe that the subject needs to be learned.

Some say grammar is best learned through reading. Dr.  Stephen Krashen finds that students learn grammar, usage, mechanics, spelling, and vocabulary most efficiently through free voluntary reading. However, Dr. Krashen does see the value of teaching some usage issues and grammatical terminology, especially at the high school level. And he advocates teaching students how to use language resources, such as language handbooks, to correct errors and improve writing style.

Some say grammar is best learned through writing. Even those who still trot out forty-year-old research studies to argue that explicit, direct instruction in grammar has no statistically significant effect on writing maturity such as the National Council of Teachers of English, the National Writing Project, Six Traits, or the Writers Workshop folks trot out their own grammar mini-lessons to fill the gaps when students have egregious errors in the editing state of process papers. I have previously written about why teachers avoid teaching grammar, but plan to boldly advocate how to teach grammar in this article. However, some consensus-building is necessary before I do so.

Definitions

Grammar has come to mean a catch-all term that refers to everything English teachers would prefer to avoid teaching. Essentially, grammar includes the part of a sentence, the function of these parts (such as the parts of speech), the arrangement of words with the sentence, word choice, punctuation, and capitalization. Grammar is the study of how our language is used and how it can be manipulated to achieve meaning.

Most of us would agree with these… 21 Curricular Assumptions

1. Good grammar is important. Whether grammar is chiefly taught or caught is beside the point. When it is simply caught by students, “They dint always catched it very good.” Grammar as it is caught must be complemented by a grammar that is taught.

2. Grammar should, as much as is practical, be integrated with authentic writing instruction. Students learn best when instruction is perceived and practiced as being relevant to their needs.

3. Not all students have the same grammatical skill-set. Simply teaching grade-level standards is not enough. We teach content, but we also teach students. We need to both “keep them up” and “catch them up.” It makes sense to develop and administer diagnostic assessments to determine who does and does not need extra instruction and in what skill areas. Yes, we need to differentiate our grammar instruction.

4. Both part to whole and whole to part instruction will work. We learn grammar from writing, but we also learn writing from grammar.

5. Grammatical instruction is necessarily “recursive.” Students need both the review and the new. Solid foundations require maintenance as much as does any new construction. You know the teacher(s) before you taught those parts of speech, even though some of your students still don’t know them. I’ll let the writers of the Common Core State Standards make these points regarding the recursive nature of instruction in grammar and usage:

“Grammar and usage development in children and in adults rarely follows a linear path.”

“Native speakers and language learners often begin making new errors and seem to lose their mastery of particular grammatical structures or print conventions as they learn new, more complex grammatical structures or new usages of English.”

(Bardovi-Harlig, 2000; Bartholomae, 1980; DeVilliers & DeVilliers, 1973; Shaughnessy, 1979).

“These errors are often signs of language development as learners synthesize new grammatical and usage knowledge with their current knowledge. Thus, students will often need to return to the same grammar topic in greater complexity as they move through K–12 schooling and as they increase the range and complexity of the texts and communicative contexts in which they read and write.”

“The Standards account for the recursive, ongoing nature of grammatical knowledge in two ways. First, the Standards return to certain important language topics in higher grades at greater levels of sophistication… Second, the Standards identify with an asterisk (*) certain skills and understandings that students are to be introduced to in basic ways at lower grades but that are likely in need of being retaught and relearned in subsequent grades as students’ writing and speaking matures and grows more complex.”

http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Appendix_A.pdf

6. Layered, sequenced instruction makes sense. An establish scope and sequence makes more sense than a “shotgun” approach. Students need to understand the function of an adverb before they can write adverbial clauses. Check out the instructional scope and sequence from the author’s Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary program.

7. Teaching grammar is more than test prep. In fact, too much of most teachers’ grammar instruction (not you, of course) is testing, rather than teaching. However, we live in the real world. Consider the timing of your standardized test when planning your instructional scope and sequence.

8. Grammatical instruction is more than just error analysis or correction. Grammar and mechanics instruction cannot exclusively be relegated to end of writing process as mere editing skills. Jeff Anderson, author of Everyday Editing, calls such activities “error-filled fix-a-thons.” Most of us who have tried Daily Oral Language or Daily Language Review would agree that this hodgepodge instructional approach does not transfer to student speaking or writing.

9. The fancy names for grammatical constructions are less important than knowing how to use these constructions in one’s own writing. However, memorization of the key terminology and definitions of grammar provides a common language of instruction. Of course, use of the verbage needs to be age appropriate. A fourth-grade teacher should be able to say, “Notice how the author’s use of the adverb at the start of the verse helps us see how the old woman walks.” A high school teacher should be able to say, “Notice how the author’s use of the past perfect progressive indicates a continuous action completed at some time in the past.”

10. Analyzing both good and bad writing is instructive. Sentence modeling and error analysis in the context of real writing, both by published authors and your own students, can work hand-in-hand to provide inspiration and perspiration.

11. Writers manipulate grammar in different ways and at different points of the writing process. Sentence variety is a component of mature writing. Check out these grammatical sentence openers.

12. One’s knowledge and experience with grammar helps shape one’s writing style and voice.

13. Degree of oral proficiency in grammar impacts writing ability.

14. Direct instruction is not enough—coaching is necessary to teach students how to write. The “sage on the stage” has to be complemented with the “guide on the side.”

15. Identification of grammatical constructions can help students apply these in their own writing, but exclusive practice in identification will not magically translate to correct application. If students can readily identify discrete elements of language, say prepositional phrases, they will more likely be able to replicate and manipulate these grammatical constructions in their own writing. However, students need to practice writing prepositional phrases in the context of real writing to solidify the connection between identification and application.

16.  There are certain grammar rules worth teaching.  If students understand and practice the grammatical rules and their exceptions, they will more likely be able to write with fewer errors. Knowing the rule that a subject case pronoun follows a “to-be” verb will help a student avoid saying or writing “It is me,” instead of the correct construction “It is I.”

17.  Some grammar instruction gets better “bang for the buck” than other. Teaching the most common errors certainly makes sense.

18. The notion that grammar can’t be learned by students with auditory or visual processing disorders or by students with certain learning styles is a myth. While it may be true that students learn language differently, at different rates, and vary in proficiency, there has been no research to show that some students cannot learn grammar.

19. What we say shouldn’t always be the way that we write. Students need to learn to distrust one’s own oral language as a grammatical filter. “Whoever John gives the ring to will complain” sounds correct, but “To whomever John gives the ring, he or she will complain” is correct. Knowing pronoun case and the proper use of prepositions will override the colloquialisms of oral language.

20. English grammar can be learned by second language learners. Some teachers think that students who speak other languages get confused between the primary language and English grammars. The research proves otherwise. Intuitively, many of us have significantly increased our own knowledge of English grammar by taking a foreign language. However, teaching English-language learners requires special consideration.

21. Teaching grammar shouldn’t take up an entire English-language arts course. Most of us would say about 20% or less of our instructional time.

How to Teach Grammar in Four Simple Steps

1. Develop a Plan

Establish a coherent scope and sequence of instruction with your colleagues, including those who precede and those who follow you. Base your plan on your more general state standards, but get as specific as possible. I suggest integrating grammar, usage, mechanics, vocabulary, and spelling instruction into the plan. Include both “review” and “new” layered skills. Here’s a very workable model: the instructional scope and sequence from the author’s Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, and Vocabulary  grades 4-8 programs.

2. Do Direct Instruction “Sage on the Stage”

The skills detailed in the above instructional scope and sequence can be taught, modeled, practiced, and assessed in 25 minutes, 2 days per week. Daily Oral Language will not get this done. Grammar instruction need not take up a teacher’s entire class.

3. Individualize Instruction “Guide on the Side”

Use an effective diagnostic assessment to identify grammatical and mechanical skills that your students should already know. Chart their deficits and find brief, targeted instruction that students can independently practice. Develop brief formative assessments for each skill. Allocate 15 minutes, 2 days per week, of teacher-student mini-conferences to review their practice and grade their formative assessments, say on Wednesdays and Fridays. Have students keep track of their own mastery of these skills on progress monitoring charts. Re-teach and re-assess skills not-yet-mastered.

4. Do Independent Practice

Require students to practice the grammatical skills introduced in your direct instruction in their writing that very week. For example, if teaching adverbs, on Monday, students can be required to write three adverb sentence openers in the story, letter, essay, or poem they compose on Tuesday.

*****

Teaching Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics (Grades 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and High School) are full-year, traditional, grade-level grammar, usage, and mechanics programs with plenty of remedial practice to help students catch up while they keep up with grade-level standards. Twice-per-week, 30-minute, no prep lessons in print or interactive Google slides with a fun secret agent theme. Simple sentence diagrams, mentor texts, video lessons, sentence dictations. Plenty of practice in the writing context. Includes biweekly tests and a final exam.

Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Interactive Notebook (Grades 4‒8) is a full-year, no prep interactive notebook without all the mess. Twice-per-week, 30-minute, no prep grammar, usage, and mechanics lessons, formatted in Cornell Notes with cartoon response, writing application, 3D graphic organizers (easy cut and paste foldables), and great resource links. No need to create a teacher INB for student make-up work—it’s done for you! Plus, get remedial worksheets, biweekly tests, and a final exam.

Syntax in Reading and Writing is a function-based, sentence-level syntax program, designed to build reading comprehension and increase writing sophistication. The 18 parts of speech, phrases, and clauses lessons are each leveled from basic (elementary) to advanced (middle and high school) and feature 5 lesson components (10–15 minutes each): 1. Learn It!  2. Identify It!  3. Explain It! (analysis of challenging sentences) 4. Revise It! (kernel sentences, sentence expansion, syntactic manipulation) 5. Create It! (Short writing application with the syntactic focus in different genre).

Get the Diagnostic Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Assessments, Matrix, and Final Exam FREE Resource:

Get the Grammar and Mechanics Grades 4-8 Instructional Scope and Sequence FREE Resource:

Grammar/Mechanics, Literacy Centers, Study Skills, Writing D.O.L., daily oral language, English grammar, ESL grammar, grammar, grammar tests, grammar worksheets, how to teach grammar, Mark Pennington, mechanics, parts of speech, spelling tests, spelling words, teach grammar, teaching grammar, Teaching the Language Strand, writing voice