Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-06T04:14:19.699Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Conclusion of the Initial Phase: The English Program of the Usoe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Michael F. Shugrue  and
Thomas F. Crawley
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

By September 1967 the opening phase of federal support for English had been largely completed. Fourteen of the Curriculum Study Centers and five of the Demonstration Centers funded under the Cooperative Research Program had submitted their final reports to the Office of Education. Curriculum materials from the Centers at Carnegie, Georgia, Indiana, Hunter (Gateway English), Nebraska, Oregon, and Wisconsin are available for classroom use this fall. The Centers at Gallaudet College, Georgia, Illinois (ISCPET), Indiana, Ohio State, and Wisconsin, however, are continuing their work beyond September 1967. Moreover, nearly ten percent of the Secondary School English teachers in the United States have attended the NDEA Institutes in English authorized by the three-year extension of the NDEA (of 1958) in October 1964.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 82 , Issue 6 , November 1967 , pp. 15 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © 1967 by The Modem Language Association of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Hook's, J. N., “Institutes for Trainers of Teachers,” and Floyd Rinker's, “Appropriateness of the Institute Authority for Elementary School Teachers,” contain additional information about and suggestions for the improvement of English institutes.Google Scholar

2 The philosophy and structure of the curriculum is described in PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 8-9.Google Scholar

3 For additional information on the project, see PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 7-9, and Gerald Dykstra, “Active Teaching and Learning of Spoken English,” Teacher Education, iii (Nov. 1962), 134-139.Google Scholar

4 See PMLA, lxxxi, (Sept. 1966), 9-10, for a description of the three approaches to curriculum being developed at Florida State; see also Herbert G. Karl's essay on the relationship of cognative processes to the study of literature, available from the Center.Google Scholar

5 Hunt, Kellogg W., Grammatical Structures Written at Three Grade Levels (Champaign, Ill.: NCTE, 1965). Professor O'Donnell's device yields almost identical figures on length of “T-units” for fourth and eighth graders as those of Hunt's based on writing samples of 1000words or more.Google Scholar

6 See Diederich, Paul B., “How to Measure Growth in Writing Ability,” English Journal, lv (Apr. 1966), 435-449.Google Scholar

7 Squire, James R., The Responses of Adolescents While Reading Four Short Stories (Champaign, Ill.: NCTE, 1964), p. 17.Google Scholar

8 See PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 11-12.Google Scholar

9 For more detailed information, see PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 13-14.Google Scholar

10 For a detailed discussion of the goals and procedures of the Project, see PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 14-16.Google Scholar

11 See also PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 16-18.Google Scholar

12 See PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 18-19.Google Scholar

13 See also PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 20-21.Google Scholar

14 The Center will publish a detailed analysis of approximately fifty important statements on curriculum theory, ranging from President Eliot's Harvard Inaugural Address in 1869to the statement of the CEEB's Commission on English, Freedom and Discipline in English (New York, 1965). See also, PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 22-23.Google Scholar

15 For a description of the curriculum for grades seven through twelve, see PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 23-25.Google Scholar

16 See Donald R. Bateman and Frank J. Zidonis, The Effect of a Study of Transformational Grammar on the Writing of Ninth and Tenth Graders (Champaign, Ill: NCTE, 1966). Through Dr. Charles Fillmore of the Department of Linguistics, we have made use of the following studies: Barbara Hall, “Subject and Object in Modern English” (unpubl. diss., MIT, June 1965); D. Lieberman, Specification and Utilization of a Transformational Grammar (IBM Scientific Report No. 1, March 1966); Peter Steven Rosenbaum, “The Grammar of English Predicate Complement Constructions” (unpubl. diss., MIT, June 1965); Uriel Weinreich, “Explorations in Semantic Theory” (Pre-publication version of an essay to appear in Current Trends in Linguistics, Vol. iii); George Lakoff, The Nature of Syntactic Irregularity (The Computation Laboratory of Harvard University, Report No. NSF-16, Dec. 1965). Much of the current work in this area involves the attempt to specify the structure of the semantic component of a grammatical theory. These references extend the explanatory power of transformational grammar theory.Google Scholar

17 For a description of the curriculum in grades seven through ten, see PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 29-31.Google Scholar

18 For additional information, see PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 31-33.Google Scholar

19 See also, PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 34-35.Google Scholar

20 For information on previous publications and activities, see PMLA, lxxxi (Sept. 1966), 35-36.Google Scholar