Monica Lim and the copying of good words and phrases in writing

By now, everyone must have read Monica Lim’s letter to Minister of Education.   Many readers have written to express support for her views about the school system. I won’t repeat them but you can read her original post here  and the subsequent feedback she received. She also mentioned in her post that many readers took her words too seriously, dissected everything, and read too much into what she wrote. I hope I am not doing that in quoting and using part of her letter for this discussion. But there is one part of her letter that I want to comment on as it can be potentially misleading. I have taken the liberty of reproducing it here:

For example, I find that the way many subjects are taught in schools are based on the marking template, understandably because if the objective is to maximise scores, then you teach to fulfil this objective. I’m a corporate writer and one of my biggest pet peeves is the way composition writing is taught in primary schools.

Many teachers today are told to mark the language of a composition based on how many "good phrases" are used. In my son’s school, a commercial book of good phrases is part of the syllabus and the kids are told to learn these phrases, even for spelling. These phrases are often so bombastic and pretentious that nobody in real life would actually use them. Yet the students are taught them because “ticks” are given for each “good phrase” and added to their vocabulary score.

I remember during a parent-teacher conference, I raised my concerns to my son's English teacher. To my utter surprise, she agreed with me. She said that once the school started imposing the memorising of good phrases for composition, she ended up with 44 scripts of almost identical introductions (mostly about the "fiery sun in the sapphire sky"). Unfortunately, her hands were tied.

I know why this is imposed - it's to make marking simpler. This way, schools don't have to depend on the arbitrary standards of each marker and the marker just has to follow a matrix. It's certainly more orderly but don't mistake it for creativity. I don't know any other education system which designs its curriculum around the grading. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

I think there are some misconceptions here that should be clarified and perhaps someone has written to Monica about this. But the issues concern teachers as well, so I thought I’d address them here. Let me begin with first part:

For example, I find that the way many subjects are taught in schools are based on the marking template, understandably because if the objective is to maximise scores, then you teach to fulfil this objective

First, I don’t know if all schools use the marking template (what does this look like?) as a guide to teaching. Generally, schools give 20 marks for language and 20 marks for content when marking essays. As to what makes for good language and content, that has remained elusive until the recent introduction of holistic assessment. If the school is using some form of holistic assessment, teachers should have analysed the criteria that make for good writing. These criteria then become a part of the assessment criteria (in the form of rubrics) but these are also shared with students so that they know how to work towards achieving the goal of a good essay. If the school has used “good phrases and words” as part of their criteria for language, this is not wrong. What is wrong is their understanding of what “good words and phrases” are. They are certainly not a list from a commercial publication.

I don't know any other education system which designs its curriculum around the grading. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

I don’t think this is true. The curriculum is not designed around the grading. But it’s true that there is a move to make grading more transparent by articulating the criteria for each grade awarded.  This is meant as feedback to students so that they understand what they need to work towards to get good grades. Articulating the criteria also helps teachers be very clear about the skills and strategies they need to teach to help students do well. Doing well in say writing, for instance, is not just about getting good grades in exams. Students who strive to be good writers have a right to know how well they are doing and what they need to work harder on.

Many teachers today are told to mark the language of a composition based on how many "good phrases" are used. In my son’s school, a commercial book of good phrases is part of the syllabus and the kids are told to learn these phrases, even for spelling. These phrases are often so bombastic and pretentious that nobody in real life would actually use them. Yet the students are taught them because “ticks” are given for each “good phrase” and added to their vocabulary score.

We all know about these fanciful phrases our students use. In fact, I wrote an article about this a couple of years ago (found in The Learning Teacher 2), under the title “Azure blue skies and magnolia clouds”, a favourite phrase then. I gather from Monica’s letter that schools have moved on to “fiery sun in the sapphire sky” now J.  I completely agree with Monica about the “bombastic and pretentious nature” of these phrases and I also have to admit that teachers do count these as examples of good vocabulary. They shouldn't.

But then, I have to defend this method of teaching pupils to emulate good writers and to borrow their words. I personally think that there’s nothing wrong with this. In fact, I have a book helping children to do this ( My Collection of Words and Phrases  for Vocabulary Writing and Composition Writing, co-written with Zenda Leu, Teachers’ Productions). Many established teachers and books recommend using mentor texts to teach writing. Try googling “mentor texts” and you’ll find many books on this topic. Typically, teachers will select examples of good writing (these include sentences and words) to show students how certain effects in writing are achieved through such choices. 

As young writers, did you not copy words and phrases from your favourite writers and used these in your essays? I did, not just for English but also for History. I think the first step towards developing your own style is to copy (or emulate, my preferred word) your favourite writer. This is a natural part of writing development. So, the issue for me here is not the copying of words and phrases. It’s first, the kind of words and phrases that pupils were told to copy and second, the way these are taught to them. Who would give forty students 5 phrases to describe the weather? Would you blame them for giving them back to you? No. In fact, they should be given credit because they have shown you that they have learnt the phrases well and reused them as required. But this is exactly what’s wrong.

Teaching is not about spoon feeding kids with a list of words and phrases. It’s about showing them examples and then leading them to discover other examples by themselves. The practice of typing up lists of words for kids to memorise should stop. It doesn’t make the teacher look diligent; teachers should know that if students don’t do the copying and thinking themselves, they won’t learn anything. There are thousands of excellent words and phrases from any contemporary fiction written for children and young adults that can be introduced to students. Teachers can use these as resources instead of resorting to the convenience of “commercial publications”.

I remember during a parent-teacher conference, I raised my concerns to my son's English teacher. To my utter surprise, she agreed with me. She said that once the school started imposing the memorising of good phrases for composition, she ended up with 44 scripts of almost identical introductions (mostly about the "fiery sun in the sapphire sky"). Unfortunately, her hands were tied.

Frankly, I am a little peeved with the teacher above. I think she conveniently passed the buck and blamed school policy instead of giving a proper explanation. In doing so, I think she made teachers look foolish.

I am surprised that there are schools that still embrace this approach for teaching kids to write.  I assume that Monica’s child is in a better than average school, and this makes this approach even more incomprehensible.  And I wonder why the teacher was meekly accepting the policy when, in the same breath, she complained that all the children were writing badly as a result. Should she not have brought this observation to her Head? Could she not have taught other phrases and words to her children or taught them how to vary the use of these words and phrases? Was there really nothing that she could have done but follow orders? 

 Well, she could have done some the following. She could have discussed the words and phrases given and how they are typically used. Students could then decide what they could select from the list given. They could also work on creating a list of synonyms or similar phrases so that they have a lot more to choose from. She could have taught them to consider carefully the appropriateness of these words and phrases in the writing that they typically do. While there is nothing wrong with the “fiery sun” or the “sapphire sky”, they would be more appropriate in another type of writing rather than the picture compositions that primary students write.  All teachers should be wary of using any commercial material (including textbooks) unquestioningly.  

Finally, I don’t want to sound as if I am picking on this poor teacher. I am not. But it is unfortunate that her explanation was reported for the whole country to read. And reading it, I felt indignant, even angry, because here again is another misrepresentation of what is happening in our schools. 

To reiterate: my main point is that it’s perfectly fine for young writers to learn by copying but

•  Students should not copy words and phrases that do not fit with the type of text (story) they are writing.
•  Students should not copy from amateur writers and commercial books.
•  Teach pupils to copy judiciously and to develop their own list of words through reading widely.
• Don’t copy words for your students; let them copy these for themselves.
• Always give children a choice of words and phrases that can be used in their writing.

Finally, good writing is not just about fancy words and phrases or so called “big” words. It’s about using appropriate words. Many schools (and tuition centres) insist that children replace all their “small” words with multisyllabic words without considering the appropriateness of these words.    The same principle applies to the use of figurative language. It is very tiring to read a simile or a metaphor in every other sentence, especially when the same old trite images are used.  It’s not enough to teach students to use imagery; it’s better to have no imagery than an inappropriate one. 

It’s instructional to remember what George Eliot once said: The finest language is mostly made up of simple unimposing words.  
 

Five Myths of Writing Instruction

Every time I meet a new group of teachers, I am asked the same questions about teaching writing. There are indeed some myths about what should and should not be taught in writing lessons. Here is my list of the top 5 myths.

1. Do not begin a sentence with because, and, but and so.

This was probably advice learnt when teachers were pupils and it’s sadly inaccurate and misleading. It is perfectly alright to begin sentences with conjunctions but you must always make sure that you are writing a complete sentence. So, it’s not okay to say, “Because he was sick” but it’s absolutely fine to say, “Because he was sick, he stayed at home.” Teachers probably gave that advice to prevent students from writing fragments ( but see point 2). Give students the real reason why you don’t want them to start a sentence that way. Don’t just tell them they cannot do it.

2. Do not write an incomplete sentence in an essay.

This contradicts the first point I know but good writing involves a judicious use of fragments and isolated words. Writers use a balance of long and short sentences, including fragments to add variety to their style and to express or reinforce certain meanings. Here is an example from Gary Paulsen’s Hatchet. A plane crash has left young Brian Robeson alone in the wilderness. In this extract, he finally succeeded in making a fire.

If he kept the fire small it would be perfect and would keep anything like the porcupine from coming through the door again.
A friend and a guard, he thought.
So much from a little spark. A friend and a guard from a tiny spark.
He looked around and wished he had somebody to tell this thing, to show this thing he had done. But there was nobody.
Nothing but the trees and the sun and the breeze and the lake.
Nobody.

Notice how the writer uses a series of short sentences and fragments in the last three lines. The last single Nobody expresses the hopelessness of the situation, the recognition of the fact that he was truly alone with the trees, the sun, the breeze and the lake.

3. Use multi syllabic words to impress the reader.

Teachers are often so impressed by a long word that they inevitably put a big tick next to every long word they see in an essay. This has led to a false belief that big words are better than short words. In fact, many children are taught to routinely replace short words with long words as if this will make their essay better. This is not true. The best word is always the most appropriate word. Young writers are better off learning to use a word that fits the context than to just mechanically put in a long word. Here’s what Stephen King says about using words:

One of the really bad things you can do to your writing is to dress up the vocabulary, looking for long words because you’re maybe a little ashamed of your short ones. This is like dressing up a household pet in evening clothes. The pet is embarrassed and the person who committed this act of premeditated cuteness should be even more embarrassed. Make yourself a solemn promise right now that you’ll never use “emolument” when you mean “tip”…. On Writing, p. 117.
Maybe Stephen King is a bit beyond our students but it’s good advice.

4. Don’t encourage students to write like writers.

Apparently, there’s writing and there’s PSLE writing. PSLE writing is a creature that is unrelated to real writing, and I am tempted to say that it’s true given some of the incredulous tales I’ve heard about examiners’ expectations. For me there’s only good writing and for writing to be good, young writers must read a lot and learn from better writers. So, I don’t understand why teachers are so concerned about students writing like writers. In many instances, they don’t and that’s the pity of it. Give students the freedom to experiment with different styles. Recognise that at twelve, we are not looking for perfection but the ability to convey a clear message in comprehensible language. And if they write a little like Stephen King, that’s a bonus straightaway.

5. A good essay is a grammatically accurate essay.

Nobody publishes a manuscript that is grammatically correct. They publish a manuscript that conveys a powerful or an interesting message. We get so hung up over accuracy that we tell students to write short sentences and use short words. ( Here, I contradict myself I know, but the writing lesson is a place for pupils to experiment with words too.) The result is often a stilted essay with little by way of sentence fluency or style. It is hard to develop a good style but good grammar can be learnt over the years. And why do we expect out twelve year olds to have mastered grammar thoroughly by the time they take their PSLE? Cut them some slack. Read the essay for the message first. If the grammar does not hinder your understanding of the message, a few slips here and there are forgivable.

So there you are. The 5 myths of writing instruction. Do you have any other beliefs about teaching writing that you’ve been told to practise or not to practise? Do share.