Rethinking Grammar Instruction: From Rule-Based Learning to Rhetorical Empowerment

by Sarah J. Donovan


A Story of Two Classrooms

In one classroom, students sit in rows, filling out grammar worksheets on subject-verb agreement, disconnected from the creative energy of their writing. The teacher, driven by district mandates, flips through a grammar workbook while the clock ticks down to standardized tests. Despite the rigor, students struggle to transfer these grammatical rules into their writing. A few doors down, another teacher guides students in revising their drafts. Together, they explore how sentence variety can emphasize emotion or add suspense. This teacher encourages students to mimic mentor texts, examining how grammar choices enhance meaning and engage audiences. The contrast underscores the persistent tension in grammar instruction: the demand for traditional methods versus the proven effectiveness of contextually grounded, rhetorical approaches.

The Case Against Traditional Grammar Instruction

Research spanning decades has consistently highlighted the ineffectiveness of isolated grammar instruction. Studies by Braddock et al. (1963) and Hillocks (1986) reveal that teaching grammar as a set of prescriptive rules often displaces valuable writing time, offering negligible benefits to students’ composition skills. Such instruction can also negatively impact motivation, as abstract drills fail to connect with students’ real-world writing needs​.

The problem extends beyond a lack of transfer. Cognitive overload, a reliance on deficit language, and the reinforcement of discriminatory power systems rooted in “standard” grammar exacerbate these issues. This traditional approach often alienates students, particularly those from diverse linguistic backgrounds, by valuing adherence to rigid norms over linguistic diversity and innovation.

A Shift Toward Rhetorical Grammar

To address these challenges, a shift in practice is necessary—one that emphasizes rhetorical grammar, as articulated by scholars such as Constance Weaver and Martha Kolln. Rhetorical grammar frames grammar as a tool for intentional, audience-driven communication. Rather than memorizing rules, students learn to make strategic choices to enhance clarity, tone, and persuasion in their writing​.

Three-Grammars Framework: A Path to Humanized Practice

A Three-Grammars Framework provides a foundation for rethinking grammar instruction. This framework encourages teachers to move beyond traditional, prescriptive grammar by integrating three complementary approaches:

  1. Operational Grammar: Focuses on unconscious, natural language use. Students analyze how they and others use grammar fluidly in spoken and written communication. In all its beauty.
  2. Descriptive Grammar: Examines linguistic patterns and structures as they occur naturally. This encourages students to explore grammar as it evolves within diverse contexts, emphasizing linguistic justice.
  3. Rhetorical Grammar: Empowers students to use grammar strategically, aligning their choices with rhetorical goals such as audience, purpose, and genre.

From Rules to Rhetoric: Practical Strategies for the Classroom

  1. Contextualized Grammar Instruction: Students learn grammar in the context of writing tasks, enabling them to make informed choices. For example, they might analyze how an active voice creates assertiveness in argumentative essays or how complex sentences add depth to narrative writing​.
  2. Craft-Based Sentence Writing: By studying mentor texts, students can identify and imitate craft moves that align with specific genres. Donovan suggests using a four-step process: noticing, labeling, revising, and imitating. This approach helps students develop stylistic flexibility and metalinguistic awareness​.
  3. Situated Writing Assignments: Create assignments that integrate role, audience, and form and topic (e.g., genre and RAFT). For example, students might write a blog post offering “how-to” advice, focusing on rhetorical grammar elements such as appositives, parallel structure, and audience-specific tone​.
  4. Welcoming Linguistic Diversity: Validate students’ home languages and dialects by celebrating their unique grammatical structures as “innovative” rather than “incorrect.” This approach not only fosters inclusivity but also enriches students’ understanding of how grammar can shape voice and meaning​.
  5. Imitation and Experimentation: Encourage students to emulate the grammar and style of authors they admire (and who are living and actively using language). This practice deepens their appreciation of grammar as a creative tool and broadens their repertoire of strategies for different rhetorical situations​.

The Role of the Teacher

Teachers play a critical role in facilitating this shift. They must balance curriculum demands with research-backed methods, advocating for practices that prioritize students’ growth as writers. By reframing grammar as a set of rhetorical tools rather than prescriptive rules, teachers can inspire students to approach language with curiosity and agency.

Conclusion: Toward a More Humanized Grammar Instruction

The ongoing struggle to reconcile tradition with research is real, but it offers an opportunity to revolutionize grammar instruction. By embracing rhetorical grammar, teachers can create classrooms where grammar is no longer a chore but a powerful means of expression. This shift not only enhances students’ writing but also honors the diverse linguistic landscapes they bring to the classroom.

For educators committed to fostering meaningful learning experiences, the path is clear: it’s time to move beyond rules and toward a humanized, rhetorical approach to grammar.

Donovan_Grammars_NCTE24

Works Cited

Anderson, J. (2017). Patterns of power: Inviting young writers into the conventions of language. Stenhouse Publishers.

Anderson, J. (2021). Patterns of power: Inviting adolescent writers into the conventions of language. Stenhouse Publishers.

Braddock, R., Lloyd-Jones, R., & Schoer, L. (1963). Research in written composition. National Council of Teachers of English.

Donovan, S. J. (2024). The three-grammars framework: Uncovering the plural in grammars for humanizing composition practices. National Council of Teachers of English Conference.

Hillocks, G. (1986). Research on written composition: New directions for teaching. ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills and the National Conference on Research in English.

Kolln, M. (1996). Rhetorical grammar: A modification lesson. The English Journal, 85(7), 25–31. https://www.jstor.org/stable/820503

Lyons, B. (1996). Books: Teaching grammar in context. The Quarterly, 18(3), 15–17. Retrieved from http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/download/nwp_file/845/Teaching_Grammer.pdf.

Micciche, L. R. (2004). Making a case for rhetorical grammar. College Composition and Communication, 55(4), 716–737. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4140668

Myhill, D., & Watson, A. (2014). The role of grammar in the writing curriculum: A review of the literature. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 30(1), 41–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265659013514070

O’Hare, F. (1973). Sentence combining: Improving student writing without formal grammar instruction. National Council of Teachers of English.Rule, H. J. (2017). Sensing the sentence: An embodied simulation approach to rhetorical grammar. Composition Studies, 45(1), 19–38.

Skretta, J. A. (1996). Why debates about teaching grammar and usage “tweak” me out. The English Journal, 85(7), 64–67. https://www.jstor.org/stable/820509

Strong, W. (1986). Creative approaches to sentence combining: Sentence crafting for writers and teachers. Heinemann.

Vande Kopple, W. J. (1996, March 27–30). Rhetorical or functional grammar and the teaching of composition [Conference presentation]. Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Milwaukee, WI, United States.

Weaver, C. (1996). Teaching grammar in context. Heinemann.

Weaver, C. (1998). Grammar for teachers: Perspectives and definitions. Heinemann.

Weaver, C. (1996). Teaching grammar in the context of writing. The English Journal, 85(7), 15–24. https://www.jstor.org/stable/820502

Young, V. A. (2004). Your average Nigga. College Composition and Communication, 55(4), 693–715. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4140667

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

1 Comment
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Glenda Funk

Sarah,
These days students are more likely to be on their Chromebooks doing NoRedInk drills and tests, and that makes me wonder how well i coming teachers understand grammar. I remember discovering Constance Weaver years ago and loving the simplicity in grammar instruction she offered. Her umbrella rule is a game changer for understanding restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses. I think poetry offers a special way for studying grammar. It often shows more specific use of colons and dashes, for example. Knowing what a punctuation mark is doing and why it’s doing that and how it’s doing it makes grammar instruction more relevant. I think we need more sentence level instruction in schools, which is a way to drill down on grammar instruction. Understanding syntax as a rhetorical framework so students gain knowledge of how even a shift in structure and voice effects them is vital to citizens. For most of my career I had students create a personal style manual to address their specific grammar issues.