3 ms·

My disappointment in my education is how much these rules were emphasized over content. The hard part of writing is content--not syntax. Just like programming

by Gunax 3y ago

My disappointment in my education is how much these rules were emphasized over content. The hard part of writing is content--not syntax. Just like programming is about logic, and syntax is a minor nitpick one needs to know. But I think the real reason these rules were emphasized so much is that they are easy to grade and explain.

mistercheph 3y ago
I agree with this, people seriously underestimate the degree to which minimum viable effort is the guiding principle of the education stack. Making students engaged in writing critically and creatively and communicatively is a much more difficult and poorly defined task than inventing or choosing at random (from style guides that have never been used by any impactful writers ever) rules of English grammar and style and then mechanistically applying them. This generates an exceedingly great amount of profit for the textbook writers and professional development folks that reinvent and retrain teachers in ad-hoc ineffective techniques every two years. Teachers, administrators, curriculum, textbook authors, school boards, edtech, local politicians, and students all conspiring to make education as mechanistic and unimpactful as possible because it satisfies the requirements of the world external to education while demanding the least possible effort and interest from all who participate. There are many, many exceptions of course, especially among the two classes that have a primary existence instead of a rent-seeking one (teachers and students), but this is the rule in the United States today.
tylerhou 3y ago
If you’ve ever read students’ writing, you’d immediately understand why these rules exist. Many students can’t get the basics down — and their writing is borderline illegible. How are they supposed to master content when they can’t master form?
- arp242 3y ago
  I don't think these kind of rules are a good way to master form, either. The occasional mixing up of "its" and "it's" (or even "you're" and "your") really isn't the major problem; this rarely causes confusion or makes text flow bad. Even though it looks sloppy in professional writing, it's fine in a great many contexts. One of the so-called "illogical" examples is "Walking back from the village, my wallet was lost", because apparently "Does your wallet walk?", and the the "correct" is "Walking back from the village, I lost my wallet", which is basically the same sentence for everyone because no one was confused about a walking wallet in the first example (I personally don't like either by the way, and would write "I lost my wallet while walking back from the village"). Good writing is mainly about whether 1) text reads and "flows" fluidly, and 2) if it gets the point across. My main trick to get this right is to read things out loud in my head, but there are probably other ways, some of which may be better. It's certainly not about boring spelling details or personal preferences.

by Gunax 3y ago

mistercheph 3y ago

I agree with this, people seriously underestimate the degree to which minimum viable effort is the guiding principle of the education stack. Making students engaged in writing critically and creatively and communicatively is a much more difficult and poorly defined task than inventing or choosing at random (from style guides that have never been used by any impactful writers ever) rules of English grammar and style and then mechanistically applying them. This generates an exceedingly great amount of profit for the textbook writers and professional development folks that reinvent and retrain teachers in ad-hoc ineffective techniques every two years. Teachers, administrators, curriculum, textbook authors, school boards, edtech, local politicians, and students all conspiring to make education as mechanistic and unimpactful as possible because it satisfies the requirements of the world external to education while demanding the least possible effort and interest from all who participate. There are many, many exceptions of course, especially among the two classes that have a primary existence instead of a rent-seeking one (teachers and students), but this is the rule in the United States today.

tylerhou 3y ago

If you’ve ever read students’ writing, you’d immediately understand why these rules exist. Many students can’t get the basics down — and their writing is borderline illegible. How are they supposed to master content when they can’t master form?

arp242 3y ago
I don't think these kind of rules are a good way to master form, either. The occasional mixing up of "its" and "it's" (or even "you're" and "your") really isn't the major problem; this rarely causes confusion or makes text flow bad. Even though it looks sloppy in professional writing, it's fine in a great many contexts. One of the so-called "illogical" examples is "Walking back from the village, my wallet was lost", because apparently "Does your wallet walk?", and the the "correct" is "Walking back from the village, I lost my wallet", which is basically the same sentence for everyone because no one was confused about a walking wallet in the first example (I personally don't like either by the way, and would write "I lost my wallet while walking back from the village"). Good writing is mainly about whether 1) text reads and "flows" fluidly, and 2) if it gets the point across. My main trick to get this right is to read things out loud in my head, but there are probably other ways, some of which may be better. It's certainly not about boring spelling details or personal preferences.