Teaching Grammar and Editing in Public Administration ... - Naspaa
Teaching Grammar and Editing in Public Administration ... - Naspaa
Teaching Grammar and Editing in Public Administration ... - Naspaa
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Teach<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>Grammar</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Edit<strong>in</strong>g</strong><br />
these writ<strong>in</strong>g deficiencies, the course design used a blended pedagogy with multiple<br />
grad<strong>in</strong>g mechanisms (i.e., exams, onl<strong>in</strong>e modules, peer edit<strong>in</strong>g, group work, <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>in</strong>dividual writ<strong>in</strong>g assignments). The course also <strong>in</strong>corporated professional technical<br />
writers as guest speakers (e.g., the county’s communication director, the city’s public<br />
<strong>in</strong>formation officer, a local government website designer, <strong>and</strong> a federal grant writer/<br />
reviewer) who provided students with writ<strong>in</strong>g examples from their organizations.<br />
Stanford (1992) provides some best writ<strong>in</strong>g practices for MPA programs:<br />
<strong>in</strong>corporat<strong>in</strong>g many short writ<strong>in</strong>g assignments <strong>in</strong>stead of one lengthy research<br />
paper; writ<strong>in</strong>g for multiple audiences; sett<strong>in</strong>g clear writ<strong>in</strong>g goals <strong>and</strong> competencies<br />
for students <strong>in</strong> the course; evaluat<strong>in</strong>g students’ writ<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> provid<strong>in</strong>g feedback;<br />
<strong>and</strong> h<strong>and</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g students’ writ<strong>in</strong>g workload, which can overwhelm writ<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>structors.<br />
The next sections discuss these best practices, as well as some pedagogical theories<br />
for grammar <strong>and</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong> more detail as they relate to the undergraduate adm<strong>in</strong>istrative<br />
writ<strong>in</strong>g course design.<br />
<strong>Grammar</strong> Review<br />
Although not discussed by Stanford (1992), the course began with a brief<br />
grammar review. H<strong>in</strong>es <strong>and</strong> Basso’s case study stresses the need for grammar review<br />
<strong>in</strong> communication/writ<strong>in</strong>g courses: “At the heart of all written communication<br />
rema<strong>in</strong>s the proper use of the rules of English <strong>Grammar</strong>. … Incoherent sentences<br />
<strong>and</strong> ambiguous thoughts doom writ<strong>in</strong>g to fail at its most fundamental <strong>and</strong> important<br />
level, communicat<strong>in</strong>g ideas” (2008, pp. 294, 297). The grammar review<br />
<strong>in</strong>corporated a mix of the rules-based <strong>and</strong> content-based approaches. The rulesbased<br />
approach to teach<strong>in</strong>g grammar (also known as deductive approach <strong>and</strong><br />
traditional school grammar approach) is a teacher-centered approach focus<strong>in</strong>g on<br />
grammar def<strong>in</strong>itions <strong>and</strong> rules, <strong>and</strong> then requir<strong>in</strong>g students to apply those rules<br />
to specific isolated exercises (Weaver, 1996). Examples of this approach <strong>in</strong>clude<br />
diagramm<strong>in</strong>g sentences <strong>and</strong> memoriz<strong>in</strong>g def<strong>in</strong>itions (e.g., predicates, fragments,<br />
subord<strong>in</strong>ate clauses).<br />
The content-based, or <strong>in</strong>ductive, approach ga<strong>in</strong>ed popularity <strong>in</strong> the 1960s<br />
<strong>and</strong> applies grammar def<strong>in</strong>itions <strong>and</strong> rules to students’ writ<strong>in</strong>g (Quible & Griff<strong>in</strong>,<br />
2007). Through this student-centered approach, students discover grammar rules,<br />
concepts, <strong>and</strong> exceptions while writ<strong>in</strong>g or edit<strong>in</strong>g their assignments. Weaver (1996)<br />
advocated for the content-based approach for teach<strong>in</strong>g grammar <strong>and</strong> citied many<br />
studies (i.e., Calk<strong>in</strong>s, 1980; DiStefano & Killion, 1984; Harris & Rowan, 1989;<br />
Noguchi, 1991) conducted on elementary through college-aged students. Specifically<br />
applicable to the design of the adm<strong>in</strong>istrative writ<strong>in</strong>g course is Harris <strong>and</strong> Rowan’s<br />
(1989) study of undergraduate students’ underst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g of grammar concepts.<br />
The authors concluded that students needed the application of grammar concepts<br />
<strong>in</strong> their writ<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong> addition to know<strong>in</strong>g grammar rules <strong>and</strong> def<strong>in</strong>itions. Specifically,<br />
students <strong>in</strong> the study could def<strong>in</strong>e a sentence, but failed to differentiate between<br />
a fragment or run-on sentence <strong>and</strong> a grammatically correct sentence (Weaver, 1996).<br />
Journal of <strong>Public</strong> Affairs Education 521