re: Correct grammar be like racist

quote:

---

She's literally doing the opposite. Like, the precise opposite.

---

I don’t think “opposite” means what you think it means. The Rutger English Chair clearly states that the English Department will abandon objective grammatical standards in favor of a more inclusive grading experience that is wholly subjective:

“This approach challenges the familiar dogma that writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues so as to not put students from multilingual, non-standard ‘academic' English backgrounds at a disadvantage... Instead, it encourages students to develop a critical awareness of the variety of choices available to them w/ regard to micro-level issues in order to empower them and equip them to push against biases based on "written" accents.”

quote:

---

quote:
This approach challenges the familiar dogma that writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues so as to not put students from multilingual, non-standard ‘academic’ English backgrounds at a disadvantage


So they want to change the rules of english to whatever anyone wants goes?

---

This reads to me as if they are no longer focusing just on grammar and sentence structure but additional things as well. It sounds like this will be focusing on additional things and not just grammar. I don’t think this is the freak out people are making.

quote:

---

This is code for if you aren’t white, then whatever you write is correct and can’t be questioned. If it is questioned, then it can be claimed that a bias based on “written” accents has been acted upon by grading a written composition with “proper” English as part of the rubric.

---

Again, she's saying literally the opposite. She's saying that a composition written in non-standard English will be subject to the biases of the reader. You even gave an example earlier, “I can go to the bathroom?” which as a question we all understand perfectly. For many people, that's a natural way to ask that question.

However, we also know that a reader (or listener) will make certain assumptions about the writer (or speaker) that they would not make if they wrote the equivalent sentence of "Can I go to the bathroom?" Thus her students need to have an awareness that those two equivalent sentences will yield different responses. For this reason, she rejects the en vogue dogma that writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues.

I mean, read what she actually wrote.

quote:

---

This approach challenges the familiar dogma that writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues so as to not put students from multilingual, non-standard ‘academic’ English backgrounds at a disadvantage,”

---

Soooo wouldn't that be a shift to greater attention on grammar?

quote:

---

Which question?

---

So would the following question:

“I can go to the bathroom?” be deemed correct grammatically now?

You didn’t answer it. Instead you deflected actually answering the question by referring back to the article. I then used what YOU posted to illustrate that your deflection was irrelevant in relation to the question. To which you replied:

quote:

---

Which question?

---

soooooooo...answer the question.

quote:

---

I mean, read what she actually wrote.

---

Yep, I read it the way you do and agree it’s pretty clear.

So instead of teaching proper grammar in class, they’ll just let these people go into the real world where bad grammar is a quick way to have hiring managers toss those resumes in the trash.

You are still deflecting and still haven’t answered the question. It is a simple yes or no answer. Jeez.

quote:

---

I don’t think “opposite” means what you think it means. The Rutger English Chair clearly states that the English Department will abandon objective grammatical standards in favor of a more inclusive grading experience that is wholly subjective:

---

She wrote that they will not be abandoning objective grammatical standards but rather re-emphasizing them. Opposite is the precise word I'm looking for here.

quote:

---

quote:
Incorporating “critical grammar” into our pedagogy. This (Rutgers') approach challenges the familiar dogma that writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues so as to not put students from multilingual, non-standard "academic" English backgrounds at a disadvantage. Instead, it encourages students to develop a critical awareness of the variety of choices available to them w/ regard to micro-level issues in order to empower them and equip them to push against biases based on "written" accents.

---

I mean, I don't know how to say this many other ways. There exists a principle, a dogma if you will that grading adherence to standard English disadvantages those for whom standard English is not their natural tongue. This dogma is followed at many other schools. This dogma suggests that because of the aforementioned issue with students from a non-standard English background, writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues. Rutgers is specifically challenging that dogma. So when you write.

quote:

---

the English Department will abandon objective grammatical standards in favor of a more inclusive grading experience that is wholly subjective:

---

You're not only making up things that she never said. You are flat out denying the plain meaning of the words she's written.

Read her actual words.

quote:

---

You are still deflecting and still haven’t answered the question. It is a simple yes or no answer. Jeez.

---

So when you wrote:

quote:

---

So would the following question:

“I can go to the bathroom?” be deemed correct grammatically now?

---

And I wrote that

quote:

---

At Rutgers they would be marked down

---

That was a deflection? Jeez. I'll try again. At Rutgers, that sentence would be deemed grammatically incorrect and thus marked down.