English teaching

Press, 7 March 1984, Page 12

English teaching

Sir, — A statement that fewer secondary than primary teachers are applying for posts is an indication that they find it too difficult to teach subjects lacking the basic education. Primary teachers have not the knowledge of grammar (c/f article March 3) and cram courses for adults are ineffective. The system of teaching reading is so bad that some children learn to read and others never. Higgledypiggledy advancement of literates and illiterates prevents grammar being taught to the same “standard” class. Since so many children come from this form of education, unable to read, write (caligraphy) express themselves, spell or count, are these teachers taking their salaries under false pretences? — Yours, etc., V. H. ANDERSON. March 3, 1984.

Sir, — I agree with Mrs Brooke’s article (March 3). However, one point I think she missed is that emphasis on creative writing forces the neglect of reading. A school child is unable to write anything worth while from an empty head. At the time when one lacks the experience which would give subject matter for writing it is best to study one’s betters to see how they expressed themselves. Nothing was taught me at school about style by rule of example, except a token Shakespeare play or two. Now Shakespeare is just a name at school, as Chaucer was in my day. Five years of secondary education scarcely equipped me to read Shakespeare, let alone Malory or Chaucer. /The only English grammar was through other

languages. It seems that schools’ only function now is baby-sitting unemployables. — Yours, etc., P. OAKLEY, R.D., Darfield. March 4, 1984.

Sir,—As a retired secondary shcool teacher of English, I support Agnes-Mary Brooke in her article; “English as she is not taught.” All tradesmen expect the rules of their craft to be taught. Why should students of English be expected to assimilate rules in haphazard fashion, mistakes being dealt with as they occur? It is possible, even pleasant, to teach simple grammar, syntax, spelling, punctuation and vocabulary in systematic fashion. Many children like to know why they should not say: “Who did you see? Dad took Ben and I; Having eaten our lunch, the boat left; Different than ...” Why not use terms like nominative case and finite verbs? A noun is a noun is a noun not a Class 1 word as some innovators have it. Tradesmen are precise in naming tools. It is ironic that many students get their first

formal English lessons from teachers of French or Japanese — Yours etc., MOLLIE DICKINSON, Nelson. March 3, 1984.

Sir,—l thoroughly agree with the thrust of Agnes-Mary Brooke’s article on the teaching of English in today’s schools. But you made a sorry botch of printing it. All right, I know it was only the sophisticated machinery; but if it cannot do better than make 14 spelling mistakes in a short article on such a subject it was not worth installing, however strongly your shareholders may disagree. The machinery is no longer brand new, but one often notices still that all its bugs are by no means ironed out.— Yours, etc., E. de LACEY. Ashburton, March 3, 1984.

[We plead guilty to spelling errors in the article, although we cannot find all 14. They are ours — the journalists’ and printers’ — not our machines’.—Editor]