Fish and this week's presentations

The presentations that we had this week were very impressive everyone! Great graphics, audience engagement activities and handouts. See my previous blog last week on Hume, Vico and Locke, which I wrote by error instead of focusing on Enos and Moss. I did the right one on Monday. Incidentally it was on p. 100 of the article by Kaneavey in Moss's work that he states grammar was the study of literature, as distinguished from logic and dialectic, although all three he felt were distinguished from rhetoric. If anyone ha any ideas about what this means I would love to hear it? I had to agree with Fish that a writing course that does not focus on anything else has a certain appeal, but then so does cros-curricular knowledge building (4). Still,I would think one ight well go before the other one go before the other. He says that such a course must be devoted to "grammar, style, clarity, and argument" (2). The reality of the matter is that middle schools feel that the teaching of grammar belongs in elementary school. If it is being pushed off at that level, it is being pushed off in most high schools, and many colleges as well. It is a skills that needs review, drill, discussion and critical feedback throughout the educational life of a student on an elementary and secondary level,for an adequate foundation to have been laid. Even so, reviewing in a college level course may well be more fruitful than previous reviews, as the student should have the maturity and hopefully the motivation within to absorb the information that they may have lacked previously.