Teaching the Grammar of the "Involved" Factor: A Resource Model

Stephanie Allomong
Department of Applied Linguistics & ESL
Georgia State University
Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Table of Contents

I. Background Information - The students - The program
II. What can this module do for you?
III. The Grammar of 'Involved' Discourse
IV. The Teaching Program: A Conceptual Model - Week by Week Plan - Suggested Activities
V. Glossary
VI. References

**Special thanks to Sharon Cavusgil for all of her help in developing activities and sorting out the grammar!

The class upon which this module is based is an advanced grammar class (level five in a five level program) in the Intensive English for Academic Purposes (EAP) program at Georgia State University. The class meets three times a week for an hour and a half and takes place over a ten week period with no breaks. There are generally 15 to 20 students in this class, and it is anticipated that about half will have attended at least one year at an American high school. The majority of these students plan to continue in academic degree programs at Georgia State upon completion of ESL requirements.

Although this is a grammar class, the primary focus of the course is writing, and writing well. Ideally, material will have been 'spiraled' from the lower levels, so that students will have had some sort of exposure to all of the grammatical forms we will be working with. Much of what we do here, then, is not entirely new to the students. The aim is for students to become comfortable applying grammar rules, and generating college-level written work.

Students' needs have been assessed in several ways. About one third of the students will have completed the level four grammar class at GSU with a grade of 'C' or better. These students are not expected to have mastered the material presented in that class, but they should be prepared for material presented at level five. Students who are new to the program will have taken the Georgia State Test of English Proficiency (GSTEP) and placed into the level five class.

The primary goal of this course is to prepare students for writing tasks encountered in undergraduate university programs. Specifically, students should be able to do extended writing (e.g., essay exams and papers) that is clear, adhering to academic English rhetorical style, focused (not veering off-topic) and with relatively few grammatical errors of the type that would hinder comprehension or distort the author's intended meaning. A secondary goal of the course is for students to develop an awareness of the systematic omission and combination of sounds in spoken English. As stated in GSU's ESL 065 syllabus, "Often, non native speakers do not realize that the sounds or syllables omitted in the flow of spoken English are, nevertheless, part of the grammar of well formed sentences of English. Therefore, they fail to include them when they write."

Return to top

The traditional ESL grammar curriculum divides material into 'chunks' to be covered at different levels. The 'chunks' have been determined according to two general principles "(1) notions of linguistic complexity--which things must be learned in preparation for the next higher level and (2) notions of easiness and difficulty--which thing are easier or harder for students to learn" (Byrd, in pressa, p.1). The decision is often further influenced by the availability of grammar texts and the grammatical forms presented in a particular text. The problem that arises here is the inconsistency with which grammatical forms are assigned. If the grammar text provided for teachers at level two deals with items L through Q, the items L through Q are what we will study.

Investigating the nature of this inconsistency, Patricia Byrd (in pressa) calls into question the stability of the concepts of "complexity", "easiness", and "difficulty" in regard to this issue and indicates that there may just be a better way to organized presentation of the material. Students who have come from other programs may have covered structures yet to be seen by learners in the present situation, and may have no experience with forms these students are assumed to have mastered. In addition, this traditional curriculum design is often frustrating for teachers who struggle to "fit everything in" before the end of the term, as decreed by the powers that be.

This module is designed to help ESL teachers teach grammar in such a way that it is not divided across levels. The key concept here is that grammar is taught according to the grammatical forms identified in three different types of discourse identified by Douglas Biber in Variation Across Speech and Writing (1988): narrative (story telling), interactive--or involved ('oral' style) and informational ('literate' style). Tasks required of the students as writers, readers, speakers and listeners are identified, and the grammatical features that cluster together, which are required to successfully deal with those types of tasks, are taught. In this way, students learn the language as a unified whole, not in a decontextualized, fragmented manner.

This resource module focuses on 'involved' communication in an advanced grammar class (see section III for an in-depth discussion of the 'involved' factor), suggesting activities for the teaching of grammar within the context of what students are reading and writing, while, unlike traditional curricula, assessing learners on proficiency, not knowledge of specific forms. Where the traditional curriculum generally states that students will have mastered X% of material Y, we will be teaching all of the grammar of the various discourse types without expecting learners to learn everything. All material is encountered by students even at the lowest levels, though instruction will be made appropriate to the proficiency levels of learners. At the lower levels, they may simply have seen the forms in use, while gaining practice in the use of each at the higher levels. Here, we will look in on this advanced grammar class to see how: (1) 'involved' material is spread out over a term, (2) material can be 'looped' (spiraled) back so that students see it again and again (within and among proficiency levels), and (3) we can determine material to be covered based on tasks our learners must eventually fulfill.

Return to top

This module is based on what Douglas Biber (1988) calls 'involved' or 'interactive' discourse. This type of discourse is "associated in one way or another with an involved, non-informational focus, due to a primarily interactive or affective purpose and/or to highly constrained production circumstances. These features can be characterized as verbal, interaction, affective, fragmented, reduced in form, and generalized in content" (p. 105). Although often found in oral communication, 'involved' features are frequently found in written text that is intended to 'grasp' or relate to the reader in much the same way as the spoken word. Chafe and Danielwicz (1987) suggest that perhaps we are missing the mark by distinguishing between written and oral text; maybe there are simply an abundance of varieties of language to choose from, and any one of them might be spoken or written depending on the circumstance.

Following is a list of the features that appear in 'involved' discourse, according to Biber:

Technical Note: Clicking on 'go to glossary' will take the reader to a listing of terms and definitions.

Biber includes the following: go to glossary

• private verbs
• 'that' deletion
• contractions
• present tense verbs
• 2nd person pronouns
• Do as pro-verb
• analytic negation
• demonstrative pronouns
• general emphatics
• 1st person pronouns
• pronoun IT
• Be as main verb
• causative subordination
• discourse particles
• indefinite pronouns
• general hedges
• amplifiers
• sentence relatives
• WH questions
• possibility modals
• non-phrasal coordination
• WH clauses
• final prepositions
• adverbs of time and frequency
• conditional subordination

The challenge in dealing with interactive discourse is that it is so often conversational in style. As such, we might rightfully surmise that the only writing of this kind that our students will be doing is e-mail, journals, letters, and the like. However, they will be exposed to it a great deal and they will often be required to take what they have gleaned from 'involved' communication and use it to create appropriate academic written text. Psychology textbooks provide good examples of features of 'oral' communication being used to 'involve' the audience with the content (Byrd, in pressb). Further, many texts contain several discourse types. For example, story-telling is often a combination of 'involved' and 'narrative' communication (e.g., talking about events of the past, while attempting to relate to an audience in the present moment).

In an attempt to move away from grammar in context and toward teaching grammar through context, I have chosen material of the type that my students will encounter later in their university careers. The reason for this is that "the search for grammar starts with context; form and meaning are combined into one set because forms get their meaning when placed in contexts" (Byrd, in pressb, p.2). To choose content based on the grammar we want to teach is to revert back to arbitrary assignment of grammatical forms. In this particular class, our ultimate communicative goal is this: to use information gathered through oral interviews, video ('involved' discourse) in conjunction with research, lecture notes and readings to create academic writing. In order for students to attain that goal, particular grammatical forms must be learned (see above for list of features of 'involved' discourse).

Much of what constitutes the involved factor appears to be a direct result of production constraints placed on speakers/writers (e.g., time considerations, lack of planning time, etc.). Edward Finegan and Douglas Biber (1986) referred to 'interactive' or 'involved' text as being the opposite of 'edited' text, indicating that conversation and academic prose were opposites because conversation obviously did not allow time for editing. They used the analogy of a tug of war that takes place between the desire for clear communication and the need for efficient communication (Finegan and Biber, 1986). It is fortunate for the speaker or writer, they say, that the need for efficient communication often results in reduction of forms and minimal expression.

While time constraints may have a tremendous impact on choices made by a writer or speaker, there are many other reasons for the differences. Deborah Tannen (1985) talks about Involvement-focused vs. message-focused communication. It is often the case, she says, that the act of speaking with someone is more important than the message being sent. (Dinner conversation, for example.) It is also true that an author's identification with his audience or with the material will effect his/her choice of style. For example, one who is interacting with a friend, or relating a humorous story in hopes that all will be amused will tend to use the 'involved' style.

The following excerpt is taken from a talk given in 1990 "in honor of and in tribute to the life and memory of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr." by Dr. Samuel P. Massie. It appears on the World Wide Web, and is entitled Where Do We Go From Here? (Economic Club of Detroit, 1996). It is included here as an illustration of 'involved' communication, and the cluster of grammatical features associated with it.

Note the 'interactive' tone of this text as you read. What is it that creates that tone?

QUESTION: "With the coming labor shortage and the lack of qualified students to meet the future needs of American industry, do you feel it is paramount for corporations to get involved in our educational system and, if so, how?"

ANSWER: First, that's an easy question to answer in one respect. They must, for there is a shortage of labor supply. And if they do not develop properly trained people, we will fall further behind. You see, one of the tragedies we're running into in competing with countries like Japan, and now Germany--and they may soon be unified, don't forget that--is that in those countries they put a little bit more emphasis on helping their young people become prepared to enter the work force.

In our country we've had sort of a laisse-faire attitude. We say, well, we hope they're ready but if they're not we can't worry about it. And now we are finding the effects of that.

There are several ways that I would like to see corporations do this. I would like to see perhaps some corporations--as some of you are doing; so, when I say what you should be doing, this doesn't mean you're not already doing it--help us to sponsor some elementary and secondary schools. Provide them with some of the equipment that they need. Some of you are already doing this with computers and other electronic instrumentation.

Now, look for the following linguistic features of 'involved' discourse in the text.

(They really do show up here, just as Biber predicts!)

These are the features we will focus on in this module. (Due to time constraints, we are unable to focus on absolutely everything.)

• 'that' deletion
• conditional sub.
• contractions
• Do as pro-verb
• 1st person pronouns
• 2nd person pronouns
• Pronoun IT
• Demonstrative pronouns
• WH questions
• discourse particles
• non-phrasal coordination.
• analytic neg.
• private verbs

The many references in this text to 1st and 2nd person pronouns, I, we, you, our, indicate a fairly high level of interaction and personal affect, as do private verbs (e.g., feel, forget, hope), and wh- questions (why?). I would also include yes/no questions as a contributor to both the level of interaction and affective considerations. Biber does not include them in his analysis because their grammatical formation made them difficult to distinguish from other question types. However, as in this excerpt, yes/no questions are a major contributor to involved communication because they do not generally require a yes or no answer, but a thoughtful reply or the attention of the listener as the speaker ventures on to a new topic or begins to make a point (as Massie did when he asked "...do you feel it is paramount for corporations to get involved in our educational system and, if so, how?"). He is trying to maintain the audience's attention, not expecting a response but ensuring they are 'on the same page' as he makes what he considers to be an important point--he is trying to relate to them and to get them to relate to the material!

There are also features indicating the existence of production constraints, such as time: contractions (e.g., we're, don't), pronoun it (...we can't worry about it.), that deletion (...we hope [that] they're ready...). Biber (1988) says that contractions are a consequence of fast and easy production. They are, in fact, the most frequently cited example of reduced surface forms according to his 1988 analysis.

That deletion, he claims is generally avoided when there is a perceived need for elaborated and explicit expression as is typical of edited writing.

As is often characteristic of involved or interactive communication, Massie does have information that he wants to get across, but he is not without interpersonal and affective goals as well. And he must communicate both within the production constraints of face-to face communication.

This is truly involved communication. Now, imagine that our students must take the information relayed during this talk and use it to create academic text that is appropriate for a university class. They must, at the very least, be aware of and, ideally, begin to use these forms in order to really see the difference in the two (academic, informative writing vs. involved communication) and to change from one to the more appropriate form depending on the situation.

Technical Note: provide from section III list of features to the glossary.

Return to top

(definitions/examples according to Biber)

Return to top

A. Organization of Grammar

Here, for the purposes of 065 at Georgia State, I'm focusing on the students' task of taking 'involved' (oral and/or written) discourse and creating appropriate written text for this academic context.

Initially, I suggest spending several class periods doing a lot of focused observation and transformational drills so that students increase their awareness of the features that make up the 'involved' factor and that distinguish it from 'narrative' and i'nformational' types of discourse.

The following plan is based on Patricia Byrd's (in press) 6 Principles for "the organization of grammatical content in a multi-level series of composition course" (p. 10).

Those principles are as follows:

Principle #1. At all level, students work with authentic text and take on authentic writing tasks.

Principle #2. These authentic materials require that students learn about grammatical features characteristic on academic discourse--even at the lowest proficiency levels.

Principle #3. Grammar is selected based on the features of the discourse that the students need to handle.

Principle #4. Grammar is presented in clusters of features.

Principle #5. The proficiency levels are distinguished not by the individual items of grammar assigned to each, but by the complexity of the reading and writing to be done by the students.

Principle #6. The plan gives students multiple opportunities to encounter the language of academic reading and writing.

The assumption at level five is that the students are able to work with all of the forms with which they will be interacting, and, so, there is to be little or no explicit grammar teaching unless it is determined by the teacher and/or the students that there is a need for such instruction. The Handbook provides excellent examples, explanations and exercises which will be assigned to students who need extra work and as preparation for class if and when explicit instruction is deemed appropriate. The ultimate communicative goal of the course is the utilization of information gathered through interviews, research, lectures, and the viewing of video segments in a 3 to 5 page length research paper, the style of which is expected to be appropriately informative and academic, regardless of the form in which the information was received. In other words, students will be working all term with the features of the 'involved' factor, and eventually demonstrate that they are able not only to determine when a text is involved, but also to take information presented in the 'involved' communication style and change it to a style that is more appropriate to an academic setting.

The following section itemizes the activities that are likely to be encountered in an advanced academic grammar/writing class, focusing on the 'involved' factor.

B. Activities

You will notice that most of these activities are highly contextualized. At this advanced level, we are dealing less with specific grammatical forms and more with the use of these forms in the context of course material and student writing.

In addition, where appropriate, suggestions have been made concerning how to deal with the various learning styles that are inevitably present in any classroom. In Grammar in the Composition Classroom (in press), Joy Reid calls for the need to raise our awareness of the needs of our 'mixed bag' of students and to address those needs to the best of our ability:

Most important for teachers in US colleges and universities is that within any class of students, and particularly within the diverse classroom of native English Speakers and ESL students, many preferred learning styles exist. Consequently, in order to provide an atmosphere that allows all students to perform at their highest potential, teachers must become sensitive to those differences and plan lessons that accommodate those preferences (pp. 3-4).

Learner's Notebook

This is an ongoing activity that should be introduced by the third day of class.

1. Students are provided with a chart for each of the features on which we will focus in this course--the chart is simply a piece of paper, 81/2 x 11, with the name of no more than one feature in bold across the top. The students have space to write in the words, phrases, sentences they encounter in this class which they would like to remember, or that are difficult for them to use.

*For the purposes of this module, we are concerned only with those features associated with the involved style of communicating that have been deemed particularly relevant to this course.

2. Students maintain these charts, adding words, sentences, and phrases as they see fit. The material gathered there, then, is available for them to use in their own writing.

*The notebook becomes a reference guide for students that is tailor-made with regard to their own needs and styles as writers.

3. Notebooks are checked periodically (weekly) to ensure that students are actually making use of this resource.

This type of notebook is currently being used in the advanced ESL grammar course at Georgia State University. However, the charts have been adapted to deal with grammatical features of discourse clusters.

This is likely to be a favorite among concrete, visual, and independent learners.

Focused Observation

I recommend that this be done several times in the first week or two. The primary goal of this type of activity is to raise students' awareness of the features that make up the involved factor. Students are presented with a short text, or excerpt, as in section III of this module and are asked to identify each of the features of involved communication listed. Directions would appear as follows:

1. Read the following text. (I will be using a short editorial piece about the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.--you may want to gear your reading to the content of your own course.)

2. Now, look for the following linguistic features of 'involved' communication in the text:

Variation:

Using a short video clip with an accompanying transcript:

1. Have students watch the video, listening for the tone (is it involved?).

2. Ask students: What factors make this piece of language involved?

Are these factors limited to grammatical functions (consider tone of voice, intonation, the speaker's purpose)

3. Distribute transcripts and have students engage in focused observation, circling or underlining the features of involved discourse. If your class has advanced to this stage you may try having them do this without a list of the features in front of them to determine if they really have a grasp on what it is that makes communication involved.

* Using both the video and the typed transcript addresses the needs of students with auditory, visual learning styles. Having them do the work individually, then compare results in groups addresses the needs of concrete learners who might prefer to work in groups and abstract learners who work best alone, working with theory

Text Comparison

This, too, should come toward the beginning of the term, preferably in week 2, in conjunction with or closely following Focused Observation. This should help students to gain an understanding of WHY a writer makes the choices s/he does in regard to writing style and grammar clusters. They will begin to be able to answer the question, "What changes occur in the text that bring about these differences?".

1. Provide students with two texts--one of the involved style, and one, perhaps, of informational style (this style is what they are most likely to see in university textbooks.)

2. Ask students to compare the two texts.

The following questions may serve as a guide in this process:

1) What kind of 'feeling' do you get from each of the texts?

2) Is the writer attempting to interact with the audience?

3) Who is the audience?

4) Why does the author choose this style of writing?

5) What is the author's purpose for writing?

Expansion (ideal for 4 to 5 weeks into the quarter):

Repeat the same activity with similar texts (or the same texts), asking additional questions about grammatical features:

1) What specific grammatical features contribute to the tone of the text?

2) Are any of these features characteristic of the involved style of communication we have discussed in class? If so, how have they contributed to the tone of the text?

Learning styles:

The same activity might be done using video or audio tapes rather than written text. Visual and auditory learners may greatly benefit from such adaptation.

Similarly, this work can be done in groups, in pair, or individually, with students reporting back to the whole group or submitting written answers to questions. As this is an activity that is likely to be repeated (much like the Focused Observation Task), patterns of classroom interaction may be changed with each implementation in response to individual learning styles.

Transformational 'Drill'/Text Manipulation

This activity further strengthens awareness and knowledge of features of involved communication, while requiring that learners actually manipulate text and begin to make conscious decisions concerning their choice of grammar.

*This should follow both the Focused Observation Task and Text Comparison Exercise as they provide a foundation of knowledge concerning features of involved language that are actually put to use here.

1. Distribute a list of ten sentences to the class. All sentences are related to the content of the reading, and are written in the narrative style (past tense verbs, 3rd person pronouns, public verbs, present participial clauses).

*In this case, the content is autobiographical information about Martin Luther King, as this portion of this class is centered on that topic. You will probably want to use the content of your own course as the basis for material. In fact, to ensure that students are not struggling with content but are focused on the grammar, you may choose to use the texts provided to students in the Text Comparison exercise, broken down into individual sentences.

2. Students are asked to change each sentence from the narrative style to the involved style, using the grammatical features that have been the focus of the course to date.

Learning styles: This activity is readily adapted to various learning styles. Learners can work individually, and then check their work in groups to deal with group and individual learning styles. Instructions, as always, may be given orally as well as in writing, while responses may be written and volunteers may report theirs to the class--this reaches auditory and visual learners, as well as reflective and active learning styles.

Expansion:

*In the second half of the course, I recommend that students begin changing entire texts or portions of text (of limited length, of course--2 to 3 paragraphs) to the involved style from either informational or narrative style, following steps outlined above.

*In Techniques and Resources in Teaching Grammar (1988), Marianne Celce-Murcia and Sharon Hilles suggest several activities requiring text manipulation. One suggestion they make is to have students rewrite a passage, changing the gender of the main character. I would suggest having students rewrite the text based on a change in audience that, for our purposes, requires the use of involved style.

Information Gathering

The following is based on an activity-type presented in Marianne Celce-Murcia and Sharon Hilles' Techniques and Resources in Teaching Grammar (1988), called 'text elicitation'. In that activity an ESL class practicing the passive conducted a survey. The subjects were native English speakers. Students gathered background information from interviewees (e.g., occupation, sex, nationality) and then asked one question. In reporting their findings, the students naturally used the passive voice.

*As this activity is a culmination of the transformation drills, text comparisons, and focused observation, and requires manipulation of actual text for the purposes of creating academic essays, it is recommended that this follow those activities closely.

Again using Martin Luther King, Jr. as the content, I suggest having students conduct short interviews with fellow classmates as a 'warm up' to an actual interview with a native English speaker. Students must:

1. gather background information from each interviewee

2. ask one question regarding the interviewee's opinion of Martin Luther King, Jr., his dream, or his impact on American society.

1. Students formulate questions in class, first brainstorming as a whole class, and then working in smaller groups to develop 5 or 6 appropriate, grammatically correct sentences. Individuals may then use those questions or devise their own.

2. Outside of class, students are to interview 5 native speakers of English, taking notes and taping the interviews for later review.

3. Students finally take the involved, oral style responses to interview questions and create from them an informative essay summarizing their findings.

Learning styles: Students will be engaged in group work, in silent reflection and individual work, and audio and visual presentation of material. Learners must take some 'risks' in carrying out this activity; however, this practice with classmates should serve to boost learners' confidence in dealing with the material as well as the grammar.

Variation: Have learners work in pairs, practicing asking questions about material covered in class to date. This will not only provide them with practice with this type of interaction, but can also serve as review of material prior to an essay exam or in-class writing.

Making Choices as a Writer

At the university level, students will be faced with many choices as writers. Of course, choices must be made when writing at any level, in any context; however, the choices they will soon be asked to make will be based on a new audience, a university professor with expectations regarding rhetorical style of short essays, research papers, reports, etc. This activity is designed to enable assist students in making better, more informed choices regarding their style of writing. It is best placed in the 7th or 8th week of class.

1. Provide several short descriptions of papers students might be expected to write, including audience, purpose for writing, material to be covered (distribute this in the form of a handout while orally providing instructions to accommodate both oral and visual learners). Make sure learners know that they are not actually required to write the essay or paper being described.

2. Ask students to work alone and to decide if they would use the involved style in completing the assignment.

3. In groups, have students discuss their responses and to have a volunteer report their findings to the whole group.

Again, the combination of group and individual work and the process of having students volunteer for more 'risky' tasks helps the teacher to be sensitive to the needs of individual language learners and learning styles.

Informational Interviews - preparing for the research paper

This activity should be done very close to the end of the term. In a ten week term, such as ours, it would be best to begin the interview process sometime during week 7 or 8. Students may have already gathered information on the topic, or you may want to have them begin anew with a fresh topic.

I am assuming that students have already gathered encyclopedia articles, heard a microlecture, and viewed MLK, Jr.'s famous speech. This information will serve the student in the background section of the research paper.

Procedures for Informational Interviews:

1. Students generate a list of background questions to be asked of each interviewee (e.g., sex, occupation, name) as in the Information Gathering activity described above.

2. Students are provided with a list of questions generated by the teacher, eliciting information from native English speakers about the topic under investigation.

Questions relating to Martin Luther King, Jr. that might be asked (taken from GSU's ESL 065 course packet):

-In your opinion, what have been the good or bad consequences in the black community because of the Civil Rights Movement?

-What is your feeling about Dr. King? Was he a good leader?

-Do you think there is still discrimination?

-Have you ever been discriminated against?

The preliminary stages of this activity may be geared to varied learning styles, through the implementation of group interaction, individual work, assigning homework, requiring students to reflect upon the material. The actual interview, of course, favors the outgoing, active, student.

Variation: You may choose to have learners take notes and record the interviews. Transcripts of such interviews can prove to be invaluable tools that will be available to students in the work with 'involved' features. The transcripts can also serve as models, for the students, as well as the teacher, should they secure permission to use such materials in future classes.

Research paper

*This activity is, essentially, a culmination of all activities that have come before. Students have now worked with the features of 'involved' text, manipulated those features, and created extensive writing in the 'involved' style (or from the involved style).

*This would work well as a final assessment tool, making it necessary for us to assess learners' English proficiency, rather than their ability to show that they know their grammar.

Task: Using the information from your interviews, and in-class materials, write a 3 to 5 page research paper. You may assume that your audience is to be a university professor in the school of ...

(this depends upon your students' topic.)

Be sure that your paper is written in the appropriate style.

With regard to learning styles, students may be allowed to work on topic development in small groups if they are inclined to do so. Additionally, peer review is an effective means by which students can elicit and utilize feedback from their peers. This has the potential to benefit all students, but particularly those learners who are with active, concrete, group learning styles.

Return to top

Biber, D. (1988).Variation across speech and writing. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Biber, D. & Finegan, E. (1986). An initial typology of English text types. In J. Aarts and W. Meijis (Eds.), Corpus linguistics II (pp. 19-46). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Byrd, P. (in press). It's All the Same Grammar. In P. Byrd and J. Reid, (Eds.), Grammar in the composition class.

Byrd, P. (in press). Grammar from Context. In P. Byrd and J. Reid, (Eds.), Grammar in the composition class.

Byrd, P. (in press). Grammar in the Composition Syllabus. In P. Byrd and J. Reid, (Eds.), Grammar in the composition class.

Chafe, W. (1982). Integration and involvement in speaking, writing, and oral literature. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Spoken and written language. (Vol. 4, pp. 35-54). Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.

Chafe, W. & Danielewicz, J. (1987). Properties of spoken and written language. In R. Horowitz and S. J. Samuels (Eds.), Comprehending oral and written language (pp. 83-113). San Diego: Academic Press.

Celce-Murce, M. & Hilles, S. (1988). Techniques and resources in teaching grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.

Economic Club of Detroit. (1996). Where Do We Go From Here? [On-line]. Available: http://www.doe-hbcu-massie-chair.com/tribute.htm.

Finegan, E. & Biber, D. (1986). Toward a unified model of sociolinguistic prestige. In D. Sankoff (Ed.), Diversity and diachrony (pp. 391-398). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.

Reid, J. (in press). Learning Styles and Grammar Teaching in the Composition Classroom. In P. Byrd and J. Reid, (Eds.), Grammar in the composition class.

Tannen, D. (1985). Relative focus on involvement in oral and written discourse. In D. Olson, N. Torrance, and A. Hildyard (Eds.), Literacy, language, and learning (pp. 124-147). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Return to top