A recent study, asyoumayormaynothaveheard, has found that teaching grammar to Year 2 children (age 6-7) does not improve their writing. But that’s not what it found.
The study, by researchers at UCL and the University of York, did not compare grammar teaching with no grammar teaching. It compared one particular programme of grammar teaching, called Englicious, with the grammar teaching that schools were doing already, and it found that Englicious produced results that were essentially no better than the other grammar teaching.
The research paper makes this very clear, although the conclusions section seems to stray a little into over-generalisation. And the news articles published by the two universities both lead with the generalised claim:
The teaching of grammar in primary schools in England (a key feature of…
View original post 1,124 more words
2 thoughts on “Reblogged: writing skills and grammar teaching: the misinterpreted study of Englicious”
Many thanks for your post which I will look at in due course. Could I ask if one of the outcomes of ‘ghost reading’ includes comprehension of a text or is its purpose to highlight punctuation and intonation? Regards, Ann Connell
No, this was not part of the project. Have a look at the paper. There’s a link in the blog post.