This is Part 2 of our Knowing is Using blog series. Please read Part 1, Knowing is Using: The Groundwork for Gaining Knowledge, to better understand this topic.
Let’s talk about grammar.
Let me be more specific: let’s talk about teaching grammar.
Now, if you’re anything like me about 8 years ago, then the idea of teaching grammar sounds like a horrible, stressful, no-good mess. I get why it’s important, but I don’t know how to do it. And I don’t want to do it. (And if you’re not sure why grammar needs to be taught in the first place, we’ve got some great reading about that over here in our blog, Why Grammar Matters.
Well, it’s time to change that feeling. Grammar is complicated and a bit confusing, I’ll be the first to admit. But believe it or not, it’s also kinda fun and incredibly rewarding. The more our kids understand the system and how to use it, the better they can express themselves verbally and in writing, the better they can understand what they hear and read, and the richer the experiences they can have with language, literacy, communication, and culture.
So let’s break it down.
In the first blog of the Knowing is Using series, I talked about the levels of knowledge. If we followed the typical way that grammar is taught, here’s how those levels look . . .
Typical Grammar Teaching Approach:
- Labels - learning parts of speech
- Application - practicing in a workbook by labeling parts of speech (so not a lot of application, really)
- Labels & Application - maybe some more workbook practice with just labeling parts of speech (so it isn’t deeper than before)
- Manipulating, Changing & Creating - maybe maybe a little more workbook practice that involves changing the adjective or combing a couple adjectives together (again…not really deep, applied, expressive practice)
You probably get the point here. Most traditional grammar practice starts at the “label” level and doesn’t get much deeper than that. Even when students are working with complex sentences, they are likely still just reading a sentence and identifying the parts of speech. Even the deeper levels aren’t that deep. But why does that matter?
Here’s the problem: grammar is the set of rules, guidelines, practices, and norms that define how we communicate and comprehend language. It is both very rigid (we have statements that make sense and statements that don’t) and incredibly flexible (there are many ways to express the same idea). But the point is, grammar exists because it is used. It is language usage. It is a reflection of how language is used. It changes because it is used. It is adhered to because that makes it useful. Sensing a theme?
The defining feature of grammar . . . is usage.
But a grammar lesson that only practices concepts with contrived sentences in a highly controlled workbook environment isn’t reflective of actual usage. Just memorizing the parts of speech with minimal application isn’t really usage, either. And learning some grammar concepts in 3rd grade followed by years of never learning it again is not usage at all. Unfortunately, these are often the grammar instruction approaches that reign supreme in traditional classrooms and homeschool.
So what should we do instead? Good question!
Remember that knowing is using. So grammar instruction should focus on usage. What that means is that when a concept is first taught, there should be contrived sentences and controlled work to help students understand, then it should be applied in reading and writing. Students should be creating their own sentences, building and manipulating sentence structures, finding examples of the concepts in their reading, identifying successes and mistakes in their own writing. And the obsession with parts of speech—based on tradition and philosophy, rather than research—should be set aside.
Grammar instruction needs to be function-first, usage-focused, writing-driven.
Here’s what it should look like . . .
Functional, Usage-based Grammar Teaching:
- Application - Yup. We start with the second level first! Parts of a sentence are taught first. Teaching students to first identify what a word does, not what it’s called, is the key to learning. Students use marking in reading and manipulatives in writing to engage as they learn concepts.
- Labels - Parts of speech layered over time, after students understand function. This means students already know that “red” describes “dog” in “The big red dog.” before they learn it’s called an “adjective”.
- Labels & Application - Slowly layer parts of speech labels into the functional approach.
- Manipulating, Changing & Creating - Students write their own sentences and identify the pattern they are learning. They practice in reading and writing as soon as they learn the first concept. Students learn to edit for grammar structure, and they work with manipulatives to learn concepts and edit their own work.
This approach switches the order, jumping over the very first, surface layer of knowledge, and here’s why: labels like parts of speech do serve a purpose, but English grammar is too darn slippery for parts of speech to be the rigid system we first learn. I’ll prove it.
Take this sentence: The bat flies through the air.
In this sentence, “the bat” is a noun. It could be the animal or a baseball bat (we don’t have enough context to know for sure), but it’s definitely a noun.
But in this sentence: I bat at the flies.
Now “bat” is the action, making it a verb.
So . . . how do I know when it’s supposed to be a thing and when it’s supposed to be an action? Well, for fluent language users, the distinction might feel painfully obvious — one’s an action and one’s a thing! Duh!
But for young children, second language learners, and students who struggle with language and literacy, this distinction must be explicitly taught. We could teach it by going through every word and deciding if it can be a verb, noun, adjective, adverb, etc . . . until our eyes fall out . . .
But the better, more efficient and more applicable way is to approach grammar instruction from a function-first perspective. By learning sentence structures and understanding how those parts work together consistently, I can then identify the verb in a sentence full of nonsense words.
Like this sentence: After the concert, I florpped the grobble.
I don’t know what “florping” is or what a “grobble” is, but I know that the first one is an action and the second is some kind of thing.
Students should learn to recognize common sentence structures (such as a “who or what” does an “action” to a “thing receiving the action”. Then they can learn this is a sentence type: Subject + Action Verb + Object). Learning and practicing all the sentence structures in reading, writing, editing, and with manipulatives will give students the depth of knowledge they need to create their own work successfully and expand into more complex reading and writing.
How do you teach like this? Well, you’re in luck!
We’ve put together the process and the teaching approach so you can focus on supporting your student as their reading and writing grows. Understanding grammar from a functional perspective is the direct line toward the deepest level of knowledge, leading to unique, expressive, creative, accurate output.
But remember: no matter what program, class, or on-the-fly grammar instruction you follow, it is about the process. And the process depends on usage. No matter what your grammar teaching looks like, make it as explicit and usable as possible, weaving together reading and writing to deepen your students’ knowledge and grow their literacy skills.
Get them using it. Because that will ensure they know it.
To add this functional approach to your teaching, check out our grammar program. And for even greater depth, dive into our Grammar & Mechanics Educator Class.
Keep an eye out for future Knowing is Using blogs, where we'll dig into the layers of knowledge in the other areas of language arts.
