To think spelling and grammar can't be ignored

[busyhouseof8]

DS2 is in Yr6. He came home from school with homework for a 30 minute piece of writing to describe a friend.

I gave the usual talk about being careful with your spelling and punctuation only for him to say, "it's OK, Mrs P says she doesn't mind about any of that so long as she can work out what we're trying to say".

AIBU to think that actually learning spelling and punctuation is reasonably important? DH is currently sifting through graduates to employ, many of whom have excellent degrees but can't seem to spell for toffee or string a literate sentence together. His firm runs remedial English classes just so they can write a letter to a client that makes sense and will be paid for!

Parents' evening this week - should I question her methods?

Apologies for all spelling and grammar errors in this post..............

lingle - interesting point about music. I hadn't thought of that but it makes sense. And I do see your teacher friend's point - that's why I do care so much about saying it doesn't matter, because I do have that luxury (more or less, since no-one now cares when I mis-spell what I'm working on). I think attitudes have changed since my parents were at school, and may change further.

I agree with you about sound-letter correspondences. Sorry, I was using jargon above, but what is meant by a 'transparent' orthography is when the relationship between letter shapes and sounds is 1-1 without redundancy or repetition. 'Shallow' is used when there's not a perfect correspondence but it's not bad, and a 'deep orthography' is one where there are all sorts of exceptions and complications to the rules.

lingle - cross-post - no, not really! I don't know Czech and that would be so much fun. I'm not a linguist or a psychologist and I'm sure anyone who's either of those could say more. I mostly just look back at me at school and feel glad I got the chance to write without always being ticked off for my spelling.

so English (and I believe French as well?) are "deep" but Czech (and German I think?) are "shallow"?

Spelling mistakes shout at me and, if it's in a shop, I do something about it. I have seen 'dietry', 'freshners' and 'makeral'. When the Queen Mother was 100 years old, I saw big notices in ASDA offering congratulations to 'HRH Queen Mother'! I had a quiet word and they were withdrawn.

Correct spelling, grammar and punctuation is extremely important. I was taught those at primary school and also had handwriting lessons (how to write uniformly and neatly).

It's only later during the education system and the seeking of employment that their importance dawns on youngsters. If I saw a CV or letter with bad spelling, it reached no further than my waste basket. A handwritten letter had to be legible.

Although we have a problem of foreigners coming into this country and being employed rather than our own, I know that it is often because their spelling, punctuation and grammar are better than those of our own people. The cause here could be that Europeans are taught the S, P and G and our pupils are not. Why? Because many teachers here were themselves not taught so how can they teach English Language?

Yes, I'm a pedant for correct spelling, punctuation and grammar. By the way, 'Tom's' denoting 'tomatoes' in a greengrocery shop is correct. The apostrophe indicates missing letters as in 'don't'.

(Time consuming proof read here!).

linge - I think so, and I think French is shallow relative to English. But maybe someone will correct me.

I undertook a Post Grad Diploma last academic year and one of my class mates managed to pass despite having appalling grammar and spelling. Admittedly, it was not a Diploma in the English language, but you would think that that Level 7 the students should be able to write properly!

I also cannot understand why in Yr 2, my DS is having to write reams and reams in badly formed letters without getting the practice of actually writing properly.

OP, YANBU!

re music, my friend and I both volunteer in our school. We have different approaches.

My approach is to say "don't worry about the sheet music, if you can memorise and stay on a beat that's more important" (a bit like your "write creatively first" approach).

Her approach is "you'll need to read it one day, so you should do it from the start, but I will take the time to help you "get it"". (like a good traditional teacher who really cares about spelling).

Needless to say we sometimes have to agree to differ! But I think the children benefit from having us both there, because we each recognise that they have a variety of learning styles.

alli - but should an able person, who is capable of completing work at that high level, really fail because of spelling and grammar? IMO, no.

lingle - that makes sense. I think it is good to know your teacher's way isn't the only way, too - when you realize that there are just different ways of doing things so if you don't get it done one way, it doesn't automatically mean you've failed.

So, if we're now considering music too, it all rather comes down to how far you want to take it. You can go so far glossing over the basics, but once you really advance the cracks can start to appear if you've not got a sound base to build on.

Spelling and grammar are a huge part of the primary curriculum - I don't think your ds has understood the teacher correctly.

"Maybe you struggle with English because it is your third language, though?... Oh, sorry, you say it's French you struggle with"

Actually, I don't struggle with English at all (as I hope you would agree), and it is DD (not me) who struggles with reading French after finding English rather easy to read.

Maybe you struggle with English comprehension?

Ah, ok. As I've said throughout this thread, there's plenty I struggle with!

Like for example failing to read the words 'for correctness' sake' and writing nonsensical posts ... it can happen to the best of us.

"relationship between letter shapes and sounds is 1-1 without redundancy or repetition. 'Shallow' is used when there's not a perfect correspondence but it's not bad, and a 'deep orthography' is one where there are all sorts of exceptions and complications to the rules... I think French is shallow relative to English."

HOW exactly do you "think" that? Have you not read my previous post on reading/spelling French?

And that is only the spelling. French has more complicated conjugations, noun genders that reflect on adjectives, and additional tenses. Your insistence that English is more difficult, more complicated and harder to learn than French is frankly so incomprehensible that I can only attribute it to national pride.

Cote, I read your anecdotes, and I do see you feel strongly. But I tend to go with what research by experts says on the issue. Sorry if that is boring. I know using what your daughter does is much more like proper data and undoubtedly superior.

If you are reduced to sniggering at a missing apostrophe in the post of a foreigner, maybe I shouldn't push you so much. I can make a spelling mistake, too, if that helps.

WHICH "research by experts"?

Please link to this "research by experts" which concludes that English is so much harder than other languages in terms of spelling and grammar.

cote the thing is with they way children were taught from my generation onwards I would say your written English is a lot better than that of many people who have English as a first language. In fact I have come across lots of non-native speakers who have a much better grasp of English grammar than so called native speakers.

I've never been taught grammar in English. Most of my knowledge of grammar I've picked up from learning French and German. I was at school in the 70s.

amicissima - agree wholeheartedly. I don't get this "it's too hard" ethos which only further disadvantages those who need help the most.

I had a bit of a ruck on here recently with a poster who took issue with my assertion that learning tables of by heart helped the least able, because then they could take something away from the mathematics table, even if they didn't understand the mechanics. Oh, no - learning off by heart is, apparently, unfair to those pupils who are unable to memorise anything.

I don't get the 'it's too hard' ethos either. If we all worked by that principal nothing would be achieved in this world. To me if something is difficult it is a sign I'll need to work harder.

Cote - a good basic textbook would be 'The Science of Reading', ed. Margaret Snowling and Charles Hulme. It contains articles by a fair range of people, so it covers plenty of ground. The section on 'Reading in Different Languages' tells you a lot about deep orthographies like English, French, etc., as well as about shallow ones like Italian. There's an article on 'Early Reading Development in European Orthographies' by Philip H. K. Seymour, which makes some useful points about the relative difficulties of English as compared to French.

If you followed up the bibliography in that book, I expect it would give you plenty more, if you're interested.

(Orthography, btw, refers to the correspondence between letters and sounds, not to grammar - as I've said, that will have its own impact, as will other things, on how 'hard' a language is for each individual to learn.)

Minus - I don't know about anyone else, but certainly my argument isn't primarily 'it's hard so don't bother', it is 'if you can understand what someone is writing, does it really matter?'. Obviously, we live in a society where it matters because we've decided it matters. But so does being able to express yourself fluently and get the words down on the page, and maybe this exercise will help with that. It's a balance, isn't it?