Rhetorical grammar and the grammar of schooling: Teaching "powerful verbs" in the English National Literacy Strategy

Linguistics and Education

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 378-400

  Lefstein, Adam ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Curricular enactment; Educational policy and educational reform; Grammar teaching; National Literacy Strategy; Rhetorical grammar

Indexed keywords

EID: 71049130753     PISSN: 08985898     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.linged.2009.04.002     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Abrams, F. (1991, June 14). Minister suppresses £21m study. Times Educational Supplement, pp. 1, 3.
2. Agar K. Everyday Grammar (1980), Cassell Ltd., London
3. Anderson S.H., and Butler S. Language and power in the classroom: An interview with Harold Rosen. The English Journal 71 3 (1982) 24-28
4. Andrews, R., Torgerson, C., Beverton, S., Freeman, A., Locke, T., Low, G., et al. (2004). The effect of grammar teaching (sentence combining) in English on 5 to 16 year olds' accuracy and quality in written composition. London: Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education.
5. Andrews, R., Torgerson, C., Beverton, S., Locke, T., Low, G., Robinson, A., et al. (2004). The effect of grammar teaching (syntax) in English on 5 to 16 year olds'accuracy and quality in written composition. London: Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education.
6. Beverton S. Whatever happened to primary English knowledge and understanding?. Evaluation and Research in Education 15 3 (2001) 128-135
7. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge: Polity.
8. Braddock R.R. Research in written composition (1963), National Council of Teachers of English, Champaign, IL
9. Burawoy M. The extended case method. Sociological Theory 16 1 (1998) 4-33
10. Cajkler W. How a dead butler was killed: The Way English National Strategies Maim Grammatical Parts. Language and Education 18 1 (2004) 1-16
11. Cajkler W., and Hislam J. Trainee teachers' grammatical knowledge: The tension between public expectation and individual competence. Language Awareness 11 3 (2002) 161-177
12. Cameron D., and Bourne J. No common ground: Kingman, grammar and the nation. Language and Education 2 3 (1989) 147-160
13. Carter R. The new grammar teaching. In: Carter R. (Ed). Knowledge about language and the curriculum: The LINC reader (1991), Hodder & Stoughton, London 104-121
14. Cox C.B. Cox on the battle for the English curriculum (1995), Hodder & Stoughton, London
15. Crowley T. Standard English and the politics of language. 2nd ed. (2003), Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke
16. Davies G.C., Dillon S.M., and Egerton-Chesney C. Master your English: Common mistakes (1981), Basil Blackwell, Oxford
17. DES (Great Britain Department of Education and Science), & National Curriculum English Working Group. (1989). English for ages 5 to 16 (1989). London: HMSO.
18. DfEE (Great Britain Department of Education and Employment). (2000). Grammar for writing. London: DfEE.
19. Doyle W., and Carter K. Academic tasks in classrooms. Curriculum Inquiry 14 2 (1984) 129-149
20. Earl, L. M., & Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. (2003). Watching & learning 3: final report of the external evaluation of England's national literacy and numeracy strategies. Nottingham: Great Britain. Department for Education and Skills.
21. Eggar, T. (1991, June 28, 1991). Correct use of English is essential. Times Educational Supplement, p. 14.
22. Elley W.B., Barham I.H., Lamb H., and Wyllie M. Role of grammar in a secondary-school English curriculum. Research in the Teaching of English 10 (1976) 5-21
23. Fisher R. Inside the literacy hour: Learning from classroom experiences (2002), Routledge Falmer, London
24. Gannon P. Kingman: setting the scene. In: Ashworth E., and Masterman L. (Eds). Responding to Kingman: proceedings of a national conference on the Kingman report held at Nottingham University. Tuesday 21st June 1988 (1988), Nottingham University School of Education, Nottingham 1-9
25. Great Britain. Committee of Inquiry into the Teaching of English Language, & Kingman, J. F. C. (1988). Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Teaching of English Language: appointed by the Secretary of State under the chairmanship of Sir John Kingman, March 1988. London: H.M.S.O.
26. Green B. Born-again teaching? Governmentality, "grammar", and public schooling. In: Popkewitz T.S., and Brennan M. (Eds). Foucault's challenge: Discourse, knowledge, and power in education (1998), Teachers College Press, New York 173-204
27. Hartwell P. Grammar, grammars, and the teaching of grammar. College English 47 2 (1985) 105-127
28. Hillocks G. What works in teaching composition-a meta-analysis of experimental treatment studies. American Journal of Education 93 1 (1984) 133-170
29. Hudson, D., & Barton, G. (2002, November 29). Synonyms. Times Educational Supplement.
30. Hudson R. Grammar teaching and writing skills: The research evidence. Syntax in the Schools 17 (2001) 1-6
31. Hudson R., and Walmsley J. The English patient: English grammar and teaching in the twentieth century. Journal of Linguistics 41 3 (2005) 593-622
32. Kolln M. Closing the books on alchemy. College composition and communication. Language Studies and Composing 32 2 (1981) 139-151
33. Lampert M. Knowing, doing, and teaching multiplication. Cognition and Instruction 3 4 (1986) 305-342
34. Lefstein, A. (2005). Teacher enactments of the English National Literacy Strategy - an extended case study. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, King's College London, London.
35. Lefstein A. Changing classroom practice through the English National Literacy Strategy: A micro-interactional perspective. American Educational Research Journal 45 3 (2008) 701-737
36. Minow M., and Spelman E.V. In context. In: Brint M., and Weaver W. (Eds). Pragmatism in law and society (1991), Westview, Boulder, Colorado 247-273
37. Mitchell J.C. Case and situation analysis. Sociological Review 31 2 (1983) 187-211
38. Moss G. Changing practice: The National Literacy Strategy and the politics of literacy policy. Literacy 38 3 (2004) 126-133
39. Myhill D. Principled understanding? Teaching the active and passive voice. Language and Education 17 5 (2003) 355-370
40. National Literacy Strategy (NLS). (2000). Target statements for writing. Primary Headteacher Conference - Autumn 2000: Leading on Literacy.
41. Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted). (2001). The National Literacy Strategy: the third year: an evaluation by HMI. London: Ofsted.
42. Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted). (2002). The National Literacy Strategy: the first four years 1998-2002 (No. HMI 555). London: Ofsted.
43. Poulson L. The English curriculum in schools (1998), Cassell, London
44. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (Great Britain). (1998). The grammar papers: perspectives on the teaching of grammar in the national curriculum. London: QCA.
45. Rampton B. Language in late modernity: Interaction in an urban school (2006), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
46. Richmond J. What do we mean by knowledge about language?. In: Carter R. (Ed). Knowledge about language and the curriculum: The LINC reader (1991), Hodder & Stoughton, London 23-44
47. Rubba J. A review of the National Literacy Strategy: Grammar for writing. Syntax in the Schools 19 1 (2002) 1-7
48. Sealey A. Language and educational control: the construction of the LINC controversy. In: Scott D. (Ed). Accountability and control in educational settings (1994), Cassell, London 121-136
49. Sealey, A., & University of Warwick, Centre for Research in Elementary and Primary Education. (1999). Theories about language in the National Literacy Strategy. Coventry: Centre for Research in Elementary and Primary Education University of Warwick.
50. Stannard J., and Huxford L. The literacy game: The story of the National Literacy Strategy (2007), Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon
51. Street B.V., Lefstein A., and Pahl K. The National Literacy Strategy in England: Contradictions of control and creativity. In: Larson J. (Ed). Literacy as snake oil: Beyond the quick fix. 2nd ed. (2007), Peter Lang, New York
52. Tomlinson D. Errors in the research into the effectiveness of grammar teaching. English in Education 28 (1994) 20-26
53. Tyack D., and Tobin W. The "grammar" of schooling: Why has it been so hard to change?. American Educational Research Journal 31 3 (1994) 453-479
54. Valéry P. Tel quel (1941), Gallimard, Paris
55. Wardhaugh R. Proper English: Myths and misunderstandings about language (1999), Blackwell, Oxford
56. Wyse D. Grammar. For writing? A critical review of empirical evidence. British Journal of Educational Studies 49 4 (2001) 411-427