EspritHabile

You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself  any direction you choose. You're on your own. And you know what you know. And YOU are the one who'll decide where to go...
 
 
So: Where are you going? What factors are influencing your final decision? What criteria for assessing the best fit have emerged during this decision making process? How are you sharing your decisions with programs, family,  employers, and that old psychic woman from the results thread? 

Full disclosure: I am running on exceptionally little sleep right now, I know you didn't ask for advice, and I'm a composition wonk.
I've found that grammar instruction on its own doesn't really do a lot for students other than make them sleepy and insecure about their writing and/or identity (so-called "Standard Academic English" is a construct and not an actual linguistic standard, so it's fraught with a lot of classism, racism, etc.). In my experience, students are more likely to retain, personalize, and use that kind of information in productive and meaningful ways if it's offered not as a way to diagnose poor writing, but as a series of rhetorical choices that they can make in order to have certain effects on their audience. 
Writing centers tend to focus on "global" issues like organization and content over "local" issues like grammar, unless there are things happening at the sentence level that significantly interfere with clarity of meaning. This approach works well in writing and content-survey courses, too. Once students get interested in more clearly expressing their arguments, and feel empowered to do so, they may seek out grammar or other avenues of rhetorical choice.
With my own students, I focus a lot on content, and then they either end up asking me about grammar because they feel comfortable doing so, or--if I notice there's a pattern of, say, passive voice construction--I can say something like, "Ok, so now that you've got the argument down and you know who your audience is, I think you're ready to challenge your own writing a bit by exploring what happens if you write this sentence in the active voice [briefly explain active vs. passive, using their sentence as context and example]. What effect(s) might that have on your audience? What effect most strongly aligns with your goals for this project? Ok, cool, so think about that, try it out in this draft, and let me know if you want to talk about your ideas or explore other strategies." An approach like this can help students to build confidence in their writing, and to be more willing to accept feedback, revise drafts, etc. because it's more individualized to their needs and goals and it offers choices rather than serving as proof that their writing is bad. I also find that this approach is a lot more fun for me to teach and it helps me to build good relationships with my students because I'm kind of like their personal trainer for writing; they have goals, and I show them a variety of options they could use to reach those goals. Sure, sometimes I might strongly suggest leg day when they want something else or think donuts sound better, but at the end of the day it's ultimately still up to them to decide how they want to communicate their ideas. I think that empowering students with the ability to think about writing as a heap of choices and not rules also helps them to transfer that skill to other courses and professors who have more traditional views on things like grammar. 
TLDR; you don't have to be a grammar expert, and neither do your students, to be successful in the classroom.
If this approach sounds like something you'd like to learn more about, I highly recommend Kolln and Gray's Rhetorical Grammar. This forthcoming special issue of The Dangling Modifier looks like it should also have some helpful perspectives on this topic. I'm also happy to chat via PM or on a separate thread.
Also, I know imposter syndrome is ramping up for everyone now. You're all going to be okay!
 
 

I would just say that you're seriously considering the opportunity to join them and that you would appreciate more time to make that important decision.

You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself  any direction you choose. You're on your own. And you know what you know. And YOU are the one who'll decide where to go...
 
 
So: Where are you going? What factors are influencing your final decision? What criteria for assessing the best fit have emerged during this decision making process? How are you sharing your decisions with programs, family,  employers, and that old psychic woman from the results thread? 

You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself  any direction you choose. You're on your own. And you know what you know. And YOU are the one who'll decide where to go...
 
 
So: Where are you going? What factors are influencing your final decision? What criteria for assessing the best fit have emerged during this decision making process? How are you sharing your decisions with programs, family,  employers, and that old psychic woman from the results thread? 

You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself  any direction you choose. You're on your own. And you know what you know. And YOU are the one who'll decide where to go...
 
 
So: Where are you going? What factors are influencing your final decision? What criteria for assessing the best fit have emerged during this decision making process? How are you sharing your decisions with programs, family,  employers, and that old psychic woman from the results thread? 

Hey folks: I'm likely swiping left on Purdue.
Is it time to post a "decisions" thread?

Hey folks: I'm likely swiping left on Purdue.
Is it time to post a "decisions" thread?

I'm in at Purdue but likely to decline the offer. 

Hey folks: I'm likely swiping left on Purdue.
Is it time to post a "decisions" thread?

Hey folks: I'm likely swiping left on Purdue.
Is it time to post a "decisions" thread?

Hey folks: I'm likely swiping left on Purdue.
Is it time to post a "decisions" thread?

Just received an acceptance from Texas Christian University with a fellowship, very excited to potentially be back in my home state. 

!!! That has to be a good sign. All available appendages are crossed for you!

You mean my geocities site with "I'm Blue" isn't hip anymore?

Hi, @E. Coronaria: I'm sorry--I didn't mean to insult or offend you with my post. 
I wasn't trying to say that I think you're only going to chalk and talk all day about grammar rules or that I think you're unfairly penalizing students. I'm also certainly not trying to advocate for ignoring grammar or withholding any sort of "code" from students.
I did, however, feel a need to respond to the idea of using grammar to "clearly articulate to my students why their writing is poor." I've been teaching composition for over a decade so I've worked with a lot of students who, as you said, have been effectively disenfranchised and whose confidence has been all but obliterated by past experiences with grammar instruction (or lack thereof), writing instruction, and school in general. And as @M(allthevowels)H has said, this is all part of a much larger conversation that has a lot of momentum in the field, so I think we were both trying to offer a summary of the larger state of things in order to position what we were saying in context. Like you, I care deeply about giving students access to as many tools for success as possible, and that's all I was trying to offer in my post: ways of granting and facilitating that access that don't involve having to necessarily master advanced grammatical concepts or to fall back on the all-too-common modes of teaching grammar that loads of people use because it's just the norm to do so. 
I tried to be pretty clear in my post about ways that I provide grammar instruction that gives students access to SAE without enforcing it as the only or even best way of presenting their ideas. The text I recommended is also an excellent read for anyone--not just people who will be teaching others--because it directly addresses the issues of being disenfranchised by grammar instruction (or a lack thereof) by reframing grammar is a toolkit rather than as a code students must learn or a monolith they must bow down to. The first time I read Rhetorical Grammar, I felt vindicated and empowered and it opened my eyes to ways that I could reframe my teaching role and relationship with students to give them rhetorical choices without having them leave their own grammar at the door.
Again, I'm not trying to suggest that I think you're out to do anything bad, I'm just an old fart with unsolicited advice.
 

Best of luck to you!
Also, I absolutely love your username. 

Hi, @E. Coronaria: I'm sorry--I didn't mean to insult or offend you with my post. 
I wasn't trying to say that I think you're only going to chalk and talk all day about grammar rules or that I think you're unfairly penalizing students. I'm also certainly not trying to advocate for ignoring grammar or withholding any sort of "code" from students.
I did, however, feel a need to respond to the idea of using grammar to "clearly articulate to my students why their writing is poor." I've been teaching composition for over a decade so I've worked with a lot of students who, as you said, have been effectively disenfranchised and whose confidence has been all but obliterated by past experiences with grammar instruction (or lack thereof), writing instruction, and school in general. And as @M(allthevowels)H has said, this is all part of a much larger conversation that has a lot of momentum in the field, so I think we were both trying to offer a summary of the larger state of things in order to position what we were saying in context. Like you, I care deeply about giving students access to as many tools for success as possible, and that's all I was trying to offer in my post: ways of granting and facilitating that access that don't involve having to necessarily master advanced grammatical concepts or to fall back on the all-too-common modes of teaching grammar that loads of people use because it's just the norm to do so. 
I tried to be pretty clear in my post about ways that I provide grammar instruction that gives students access to SAE without enforcing it as the only or even best way of presenting their ideas. The text I recommended is also an excellent read for anyone--not just people who will be teaching others--because it directly addresses the issues of being disenfranchised by grammar instruction (or a lack thereof) by reframing grammar is a toolkit rather than as a code students must learn or a monolith they must bow down to. The first time I read Rhetorical Grammar, I felt vindicated and empowered and it opened my eyes to ways that I could reframe my teaching role and relationship with students to give them rhetorical choices without having them leave their own grammar at the door.
Again, I'm not trying to suggest that I think you're out to do anything bad, I'm just an old fart with unsolicited advice.
 

Hi, @E. Coronaria: I'm sorry--I didn't mean to insult or offend you with my post. 
I wasn't trying to say that I think you're only going to chalk and talk all day about grammar rules or that I think you're unfairly penalizing students. I'm also certainly not trying to advocate for ignoring grammar or withholding any sort of "code" from students.
I did, however, feel a need to respond to the idea of using grammar to "clearly articulate to my students why their writing is poor." I've been teaching composition for over a decade so I've worked with a lot of students who, as you said, have been effectively disenfranchised and whose confidence has been all but obliterated by past experiences with grammar instruction (or lack thereof), writing instruction, and school in general. And as @M(allthevowels)H has said, this is all part of a much larger conversation that has a lot of momentum in the field, so I think we were both trying to offer a summary of the larger state of things in order to position what we were saying in context. Like you, I care deeply about giving students access to as many tools for success as possible, and that's all I was trying to offer in my post: ways of granting and facilitating that access that don't involve having to necessarily master advanced grammatical concepts or to fall back on the all-too-common modes of teaching grammar that loads of people use because it's just the norm to do so. 
I tried to be pretty clear in my post about ways that I provide grammar instruction that gives students access to SAE without enforcing it as the only or even best way of presenting their ideas. The text I recommended is also an excellent read for anyone--not just people who will be teaching others--because it directly addresses the issues of being disenfranchised by grammar instruction (or a lack thereof) by reframing grammar is a toolkit rather than as a code students must learn or a monolith they must bow down to. The first time I read Rhetorical Grammar, I felt vindicated and empowered and it opened my eyes to ways that I could reframe my teaching role and relationship with students to give them rhetorical choices without having them leave their own grammar at the door.
Again, I'm not trying to suggest that I think you're out to do anything bad, I'm just an old fart with unsolicited advice.
 

Thanks! The imposter syndrome is at an all-time high now; how will I do this Ph.D. thing if I can't even GIF?

Full disclosure: I am running on exceptionally little sleep right now, I know you didn't ask for advice, and I'm a composition wonk.
I've found that grammar instruction on its own doesn't really do a lot for students other than make them sleepy and insecure about their writing and/or identity (so-called "Standard Academic English" is a construct and not an actual linguistic standard, so it's fraught with a lot of classism, racism, etc.). In my experience, students are more likely to retain, personalize, and use that kind of information in productive and meaningful ways if it's offered not as a way to diagnose poor writing, but as a series of rhetorical choices that they can make in order to have certain effects on their audience. 
Writing centers tend to focus on "global" issues like organization and content over "local" issues like grammar, unless there are things happening at the sentence level that significantly interfere with clarity of meaning. This approach works well in writing and content-survey courses, too. Once students get interested in more clearly expressing their arguments, and feel empowered to do so, they may seek out grammar or other avenues of rhetorical choice.
With my own students, I focus a lot on content, and then they either end up asking me about grammar because they feel comfortable doing so, or--if I notice there's a pattern of, say, passive voice construction--I can say something like, "Ok, so now that you've got the argument down and you know who your audience is, I think you're ready to challenge your own writing a bit by exploring what happens if you write this sentence in the active voice [briefly explain active vs. passive, using their sentence as context and example]. What effect(s) might that have on your audience? What effect most strongly aligns with your goals for this project? Ok, cool, so think about that, try it out in this draft, and let me know if you want to talk about your ideas or explore other strategies." An approach like this can help students to build confidence in their writing, and to be more willing to accept feedback, revise drafts, etc. because it's more individualized to their needs and goals and it offers choices rather than serving as proof that their writing is bad. I also find that this approach is a lot more fun for me to teach and it helps me to build good relationships with my students because I'm kind of like their personal trainer for writing; they have goals, and I show them a variety of options they could use to reach those goals. Sure, sometimes I might strongly suggest leg day when they want something else or think donuts sound better, but at the end of the day it's ultimately still up to them to decide how they want to communicate their ideas. I think that empowering students with the ability to think about writing as a heap of choices and not rules also helps them to transfer that skill to other courses and professors who have more traditional views on things like grammar. 
TLDR; you don't have to be a grammar expert, and neither do your students, to be successful in the classroom.
If this approach sounds like something you'd like to learn more about, I highly recommend Kolln and Gray's Rhetorical Grammar. This forthcoming special issue of The Dangling Modifier looks like it should also have some helpful perspectives on this topic. I'm also happy to chat via PM or on a separate thread.
Also, I know imposter syndrome is ramping up for everyone now. You're all going to be okay!
 
 

Full disclosure: I am running on exceptionally little sleep right now, I know you didn't ask for advice, and I'm a composition wonk.
I've found that grammar instruction on its own doesn't really do a lot for students other than make them sleepy and insecure about their writing and/or identity (so-called "Standard Academic English" is a construct and not an actual linguistic standard, so it's fraught with a lot of classism, racism, etc.). In my experience, students are more likely to retain, personalize, and use that kind of information in productive and meaningful ways if it's offered not as a way to diagnose poor writing, but as a series of rhetorical choices that they can make in order to have certain effects on their audience. 
Writing centers tend to focus on "global" issues like organization and content over "local" issues like grammar, unless there are things happening at the sentence level that significantly interfere with clarity of meaning. This approach works well in writing and content-survey courses, too. Once students get interested in more clearly expressing their arguments, and feel empowered to do so, they may seek out grammar or other avenues of rhetorical choice.
With my own students, I focus a lot on content, and then they either end up asking me about grammar because they feel comfortable doing so, or--if I notice there's a pattern of, say, passive voice construction--I can say something like, "Ok, so now that you've got the argument down and you know who your audience is, I think you're ready to challenge your own writing a bit by exploring what happens if you write this sentence in the active voice [briefly explain active vs. passive, using their sentence as context and example]. What effect(s) might that have on your audience? What effect most strongly aligns with your goals for this project? Ok, cool, so think about that, try it out in this draft, and let me know if you want to talk about your ideas or explore other strategies." An approach like this can help students to build confidence in their writing, and to be more willing to accept feedback, revise drafts, etc. because it's more individualized to their needs and goals and it offers choices rather than serving as proof that their writing is bad. I also find that this approach is a lot more fun for me to teach and it helps me to build good relationships with my students because I'm kind of like their personal trainer for writing; they have goals, and I show them a variety of options they could use to reach those goals. Sure, sometimes I might strongly suggest leg day when they want something else or think donuts sound better, but at the end of the day it's ultimately still up to them to decide how they want to communicate their ideas. I think that empowering students with the ability to think about writing as a heap of choices and not rules also helps them to transfer that skill to other courses and professors who have more traditional views on things like grammar. 
TLDR; you don't have to be a grammar expert, and neither do your students, to be successful in the classroom.
If this approach sounds like something you'd like to learn more about, I highly recommend Kolln and Gray's Rhetorical Grammar. This forthcoming special issue of The Dangling Modifier looks like it should also have some helpful perspectives on this topic. I'm also happy to chat via PM or on a separate thread.
Also, I know imposter syndrome is ramping up for everyone now. You're all going to be okay!
 
 

Full disclosure: I am running on exceptionally little sleep right now, I know you didn't ask for advice, and I'm a composition wonk.
I've found that grammar instruction on its own doesn't really do a lot for students other than make them sleepy and insecure about their writing and/or identity (so-called "Standard Academic English" is a construct and not an actual linguistic standard, so it's fraught with a lot of classism, racism, etc.). In my experience, students are more likely to retain, personalize, and use that kind of information in productive and meaningful ways if it's offered not as a way to diagnose poor writing, but as a series of rhetorical choices that they can make in order to have certain effects on their audience. 
Writing centers tend to focus on "global" issues like organization and content over "local" issues like grammar, unless there are things happening at the sentence level that significantly interfere with clarity of meaning. This approach works well in writing and content-survey courses, too. Once students get interested in more clearly expressing their arguments, and feel empowered to do so, they may seek out grammar or other avenues of rhetorical choice.
With my own students, I focus a lot on content, and then they either end up asking me about grammar because they feel comfortable doing so, or--if I notice there's a pattern of, say, passive voice construction--I can say something like, "Ok, so now that you've got the argument down and you know who your audience is, I think you're ready to challenge your own writing a bit by exploring what happens if you write this sentence in the active voice [briefly explain active vs. passive, using their sentence as context and example]. What effect(s) might that have on your audience? What effect most strongly aligns with your goals for this project? Ok, cool, so think about that, try it out in this draft, and let me know if you want to talk about your ideas or explore other strategies." An approach like this can help students to build confidence in their writing, and to be more willing to accept feedback, revise drafts, etc. because it's more individualized to their needs and goals and it offers choices rather than serving as proof that their writing is bad. I also find that this approach is a lot more fun for me to teach and it helps me to build good relationships with my students because I'm kind of like their personal trainer for writing; they have goals, and I show them a variety of options they could use to reach those goals. Sure, sometimes I might strongly suggest leg day when they want something else or think donuts sound better, but at the end of the day it's ultimately still up to them to decide how they want to communicate their ideas. I think that empowering students with the ability to think about writing as a heap of choices and not rules also helps them to transfer that skill to other courses and professors who have more traditional views on things like grammar. 
TLDR; you don't have to be a grammar expert, and neither do your students, to be successful in the classroom.
If this approach sounds like something you'd like to learn more about, I highly recommend Kolln and Gray's Rhetorical Grammar. This forthcoming special issue of The Dangling Modifier looks like it should also have some helpful perspectives on this topic. I'm also happy to chat via PM or on a separate thread.
Also, I know imposter syndrome is ramping up for everyone now. You're all going to be okay!
 
 

Full disclosure: I am running on exceptionally little sleep right now, I know you didn't ask for advice, and I'm a composition wonk.
I've found that grammar instruction on its own doesn't really do a lot for students other than make them sleepy and insecure about their writing and/or identity (so-called "Standard Academic English" is a construct and not an actual linguistic standard, so it's fraught with a lot of classism, racism, etc.). In my experience, students are more likely to retain, personalize, and use that kind of information in productive and meaningful ways if it's offered not as a way to diagnose poor writing, but as a series of rhetorical choices that they can make in order to have certain effects on their audience. 
Writing centers tend to focus on "global" issues like organization and content over "local" issues like grammar, unless there are things happening at the sentence level that significantly interfere with clarity of meaning. This approach works well in writing and content-survey courses, too. Once students get interested in more clearly expressing their arguments, and feel empowered to do so, they may seek out grammar or other avenues of rhetorical choice.
With my own students, I focus a lot on content, and then they either end up asking me about grammar because they feel comfortable doing so, or--if I notice there's a pattern of, say, passive voice construction--I can say something like, "Ok, so now that you've got the argument down and you know who your audience is, I think you're ready to challenge your own writing a bit by exploring what happens if you write this sentence in the active voice [briefly explain active vs. passive, using their sentence as context and example]. What effect(s) might that have on your audience? What effect most strongly aligns with your goals for this project? Ok, cool, so think about that, try it out in this draft, and let me know if you want to talk about your ideas or explore other strategies." An approach like this can help students to build confidence in their writing, and to be more willing to accept feedback, revise drafts, etc. because it's more individualized to their needs and goals and it offers choices rather than serving as proof that their writing is bad. I also find that this approach is a lot more fun for me to teach and it helps me to build good relationships with my students because I'm kind of like their personal trainer for writing; they have goals, and I show them a variety of options they could use to reach those goals. Sure, sometimes I might strongly suggest leg day when they want something else or think donuts sound better, but at the end of the day it's ultimately still up to them to decide how they want to communicate their ideas. I think that empowering students with the ability to think about writing as a heap of choices and not rules also helps them to transfer that skill to other courses and professors who have more traditional views on things like grammar. 
TLDR; you don't have to be a grammar expert, and neither do your students, to be successful in the classroom.
If this approach sounds like something you'd like to learn more about, I highly recommend Kolln and Gray's Rhetorical Grammar. This forthcoming special issue of The Dangling Modifier looks like it should also have some helpful perspectives on this topic. I'm also happy to chat via PM or on a separate thread.
Also, I know imposter syndrome is ramping up for everyone now. You're all going to be okay!
 
 

Full disclosure: I am running on exceptionally little sleep right now, I know you didn't ask for advice, and I'm a composition wonk.
I've found that grammar instruction on its own doesn't really do a lot for students other than make them sleepy and insecure about their writing and/or identity (so-called "Standard Academic English" is a construct and not an actual linguistic standard, so it's fraught with a lot of classism, racism, etc.). In my experience, students are more likely to retain, personalize, and use that kind of information in productive and meaningful ways if it's offered not as a way to diagnose poor writing, but as a series of rhetorical choices that they can make in order to have certain effects on their audience. 
Writing centers tend to focus on "global" issues like organization and content over "local" issues like grammar, unless there are things happening at the sentence level that significantly interfere with clarity of meaning. This approach works well in writing and content-survey courses, too. Once students get interested in more clearly expressing their arguments, and feel empowered to do so, they may seek out grammar or other avenues of rhetorical choice.
With my own students, I focus a lot on content, and then they either end up asking me about grammar because they feel comfortable doing so, or--if I notice there's a pattern of, say, passive voice construction--I can say something like, "Ok, so now that you've got the argument down and you know who your audience is, I think you're ready to challenge your own writing a bit by exploring what happens if you write this sentence in the active voice [briefly explain active vs. passive, using their sentence as context and example]. What effect(s) might that have on your audience? What effect most strongly aligns with your goals for this project? Ok, cool, so think about that, try it out in this draft, and let me know if you want to talk about your ideas or explore other strategies." An approach like this can help students to build confidence in their writing, and to be more willing to accept feedback, revise drafts, etc. because it's more individualized to their needs and goals and it offers choices rather than serving as proof that their writing is bad. I also find that this approach is a lot more fun for me to teach and it helps me to build good relationships with my students because I'm kind of like their personal trainer for writing; they have goals, and I show them a variety of options they could use to reach those goals. Sure, sometimes I might strongly suggest leg day when they want something else or think donuts sound better, but at the end of the day it's ultimately still up to them to decide how they want to communicate their ideas. I think that empowering students with the ability to think about writing as a heap of choices and not rules also helps them to transfer that skill to other courses and professors who have more traditional views on things like grammar. 
TLDR; you don't have to be a grammar expert, and neither do your students, to be successful in the classroom.
If this approach sounds like something you'd like to learn more about, I highly recommend Kolln and Gray's Rhetorical Grammar. This forthcoming special issue of The Dangling Modifier looks like it should also have some helpful perspectives on this topic. I'm also happy to chat via PM or on a separate thread.
Also, I know imposter syndrome is ramping up for everyone now. You're all going to be okay!