Disciplining Grammar: A Response to Daniel Cole

Joanna Wolfe Carnegie Mellon University

Abstract

ment workshop gone awry. A session on responding to student work—meant to introduce the commenting philosophies fundamental to writing studies—became derailed when faculty failed to accept the orthodoxy of deemphasizing grammar and sentence-level concerns in favor of global issues, such as content development, elaboration, and arrangement. As Cole notes, such conflicts between writing studies’ principles and the beliefs of faculty in the disciplines are common. Cole responds to the issue pragmatically, reasoning that we will ultimately have greater success in persuading disciplinary faculty of our writing across the curricu-lum / writing in the disciplines (WAC/WID) philosophies if we make some effort to address what they see as the most pressing concerns with student writing. To this end, he provides a list created by faculty on his campus of ten “things ” university students should know about writing—a list he hopes will be revised as needed, over the years, and accepted by all faculty at his institution. He ends with a call to bring “discussions of grammar pedagogy out of the margins, and reconsider how grammar instruction might be optimally reintegrated into our classrooms.”

Journal
The WAC Journal
Published
2014-01-01
DOI
10.37514/wac-j.2014.25.1.02
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
OA PDF Gold
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

References (0)

No references on file for this article.