Shows that traditional grammar teaching grew out of nineteenth-century beliefs about language learning and the nature of knowledge that are profoundly different from those that direct the language arts curriculum today. Bases the account on approved textbooks, Alberta Department of Education reports, public examinations, and anecdotal records. (EL)

Explores the possibility that literary theorists and reading researchers are unconscious of each others interests, goals, and assumptions. Seeks to explore how the gaps between these two areas might best be bridged. (EL)

Proposes that communicative language teaching must be evaluated in light of second language acquisition theory and research. Argues that without this critical perspective, communicative language teaching runs the risk of being no better than the traditional methods it was intended to replace. (SR)

Examines methods of teaching the stylistics of language usage, emphasizing revision in the composing process. (RL)

Compares computer learning and language learning and how a student's thoughts are shaped by each; also details what a teacher's responsibilities may be in using computers in English instruction by reviewing current literature. (CRH)

Provides a brief review of sentence combining development and research, and suggests some future directions for the technique. (RL)

Examines the roots of the modern language arts curriculum in Canada. Claims it is based on nineteenth-century interdependence of studies in rhetoric, history of the English language, and literature. And asserts that this curriculum was designed to develop rhetorical and critical sophistication. (JK)

Provides a background of response theory, two Canadian perspectives on response theory, a description of transactional response theory and response-centered curriculum, a discussion of the concepts of participant and spectator roles in literature and of the idea of narration and storying as literature, and a discussion of analysis and criticism.…

Presents arguments to researching response to poetry that attempts to track the process as it occurs. Describes procedures designed to ensure that the responses that are recorded come close to representing the process by which adolescent readers go about making sense of a poem. (EL)

Argues, in a discussion of the benefits of collaborative writing, that teaching writing as a solitary activity belies actual experience and research pointing to it as a collaborative effort. Shows how to use peer response groups to introduce students to collaborative writing. (EL)

Discusses early experiences of children with literature, and the development of and growth in their response to literature. Argues for a response-centered, rather than criticism-centered, curriculum. (SRT)