See Jane...See Jane Run...See Jane read???

I have come to the conclusion that I do not teach reading, never have, and probably never will in a secondary classroom. Yet, this is the language I use in my classroom. Read Poe’s The Tell Tale Heart. Read the first 100 lines of Beowulf. Read Chapter 12 of The Scarlet Letter. And, I have also come to the conclusion that my students are really doing exactly what I am asking of them. So, herein lies the problem. What I mean by “reading” and what my students mean by “reading” are two very different things.

When I looked up “reading” in the dictionary, 16 definitions were listed. Among them: “to utter or render aloud,” “to examine and grasp the meaning of,” “to foretell or predict,” “to learn or get knowledge from something written or printed.” And the list goes on. Whether noun or verb, what we are demanding from our students needs to be more clearly defined if we want the results.

I guess by reading, my students are probably more inclined to adopt the definition that involves uttering sound as opposed to thinking critically. But I don’t blame them. That was what “reading” was when they were younger—matching the spelling of words with the phonetic pronunciation.

Now, at the secondary level, when I assign a “reading assignment” I am really asking my students to critically interpret a text. I think I am teaching them strategies to do this; I mean, that has always been my objective. But, I also fully realize that there is in fact a gap between what I want my students to accomplish with a text and what they actually do with it.

Maybe our different definitions of reading and literacy contribute to the problem. Perhaps it’s time that we start truly defining what it means to read or to interpret a text if we ever hope to narrow the gap.

“A woman, without her man, is nothing. A woman: without her, man is nothing.”

A panda walks into a café. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots into the air.
“Why?” asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes towards the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.
“I’m a panda,” he says at the door. “Look it up.”
The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds as explanation.
“Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves.”

Lynne Truss uses this anecdote about the “dangers” of misusing punctuation in her aptly titled book, Eats, Shoots and Leaves. A self-named “stickler for punctuation,” Truss wittingly addresses the world’s digression from using the “proper” rules of grammar and language. I enjoyed the book, being able to relate to her “grammar rants.” I mean, she’s right. Every language has rules, and in order to have full command of the language, one must use the rules properly. Take Truss’ example of the power of punctuation:
1. “A woman, without her man, is nothing.”
2. “A woman: without her, man is nothing.”
The wording remains the same, but the usage of punctuation bears significant weight in meaning.

So, as an English teacher, a supposed “master” of the English language, I feel obligated to correct my students’ grammar foibles in both speech and in writing. My motives are pure intended: I want them to sound academic and intelligent. However, the “linguist” in me has to recognize the other side of the coin. Do I assume that when my students do not use the correct rules of English grammar that they are lazy, or ignorant, or stupid? What could be other causes? What about socio-economic or racial or cultural factors? America is known for its diversity; thus, as teachers, should we not take that into consideration? It seems like now more than ever America is classified into the “Haves” and the “Have Nots” and Standard American English rules and correct usage definitely play a role in determining what group we fit into.

So, while Lynne Truss may have been in jest when referring to punctuation and grammar as a “life and death” situation, the reality is that how we speak and how we write is a reflection of our work ethic, intelligence, and overall competency. The problem, then, is how this is addressed in the classroom. Once again, back to the drawing board.