Why D.O.L. Doesn't Work

Why do we continue to teach grammar and mechanics with a strategy that simply does not work? Why do we force students to rehearse errors and teach grammar exclusively out of the writing context? Would love to hear your responses. More points at Why D.O.L. Doesn't Work and, more importantly, a grammar/mechanics warm-up/opener/bell-ringer that uses a balanced approach of error analysis and model writing is detailed at Sentence Lifting: D.O.L. That Makes Sense.

Tags: D.L.R., D.O.L., DLR, DOL, Daily, English, Language, Oral, capitalization, grammar, More…mechanics, punctuation, worksheets

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jonathan Wylie on September 2, 2009 at 10:14pm

I think it depends on how you use it. I teach 4th Grade and I like my DOL, (or DLR as we call it) for a few reasons.

We do it twice daily, once cold, and once after practice. After the 'cold' run we go over a few answers the class had and teach the skills needed for a correct answer. We talk about why there should be a comma between cities and states, why there should be an exclamation mark used, etc.

After we have gone through the kinds of errors involved, the students do another DOL paper, which has very similar skills, and gives them the opportunity to practice the taught skills. Its not busy work for me, it is taught grammar.

Another reason I like it, is because it brings up grammar themes throughout the year that may not have been covered by our reading series yet, or have been covered, but a long time ago. It is good reinforcement and helps keep some skills ticking over.

I don't use it in isolation. I use it alongside our class reading series. I teach Grammar from the reading series, and this is the main focus of the Grammar we learn in class, but in my opinion, the DOL only supports that. Your article is naive to suggest that teachers use this alone to teach grammar.

I could go through each of the points you listed on "Why DOL does't work" and give a different experience I have had for each of them, but I have probably written enough already. I could be wrong, but I don't think all that many serious educators on here are going to fall for that kind of sales pitch.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark Pennington on September 2, 2009 at 10:46pm

Atwell, Anderson, Routman, Graves, Krashen... not to mention the NCTE all denounce using the D.O.L. approach to teaching grammar and mechanics. Pretty big names in our field. Just name one research study that demonstrates a positive correlation between Daily Oral Language instruction and grammar/usage/word choice/mechanics acquisition and retention. There won't be a reply on this one, because there is none.

We need to teach what research shows to work. Why not, for instance, actually teach to what students do not know, rather than repeating ad nauseum another pointless year of D.O.L. Check out an excellent free grammar and mechanics assessment at Free ELA/Reading Assessments.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jonathan Wylie on September 3, 2009 at 5:51am

I don't care whether you reply or not. Your rhetoric is blunt and dismissive. I do teach Grammar that the kids do not know. I said that in my reply when I stated that I teach the majority of my Grammar through our reading series. As it happens, there is also a lot of unknown Grammar that comes up in our DOL. I have no evidence from my test scores to prove that DOL does not work, and the fact remains that you came on here to sell something. You can tout your free assessments all you like, but this was an advert, not a comment, for your paid merchandise. It is how you use something that is important, not always what you use.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Debbie Tanner on September 7, 2009 at 2:04pm

I heard a web broadcast last year through Stenhouse that also thought that the traditional DOL practice wasn't that great for kids because it actually had them practicing incorrect sentences (if you have them write them down wrong and correct them). The guy I heard (and I'm sorry I don't remember his name) suggested that you choose a sentence from somewhere else (like a story that you read) that had something you wanted to point out to the kids, like say a simile. You copied the sentence on the board and had the kids talk about what was good about it. Then the teacher wrote a sentence in the same pattern. The kids then compared the two sentences (apparently the compare and contrast piece had good transfer results). Then the kids wrote their own sentences following the pattern. I had good luck with this strategy last year with second graders and I'm looking forward to trying it out on my third and fourth graders this year.
I think it's a good idea to question strategies all the time-if they aren't working, we need to change them. I found that having the kids practice the DOL, where they had to copy the sentence incorrectly never worked-they were still making the same mistakes in spelling and punctuation as before, which is why I stopped doing it.