Opinion
Reading & Literacy Opinion

No, Virginia, Diagramming Will Not Improve Students’ Writing

By Edgar H. Schuster — March 30, 2005 4 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

The recently revised Standards of Learning of the Commonwealth of Virginia consider sentence diagramming an “essential skill” and mandate that it be taught in grades 6-8. Frankly, if English teachers can create widespread enthusiasm and whole-class success with diagrams, more power to them.

There are certainly worse ways of spending class time—spelling bees, for example, in which every kid in the class but one flunks in a very public way. But anyone who believes that future graduates of Virginia schools will be better writers than students from other states needs to look at history. And I include Diane Ravitch and Linda Chavez, both of whom have testified that diagramming made them better writers.

When diagramming is talked of in the press or in pre-graduate-school classrooms, it nearly always refers to the system established by Alonzo Reed and Brainerd Kellogg in 1877, the so-called R&K diagrams. As Kitty Burns Florey says in her charming reminiscence of diagramming (“Sister Bernadette’s Barking Dog”), that system “swept through American public schools like the measles.” (It swept through America’s Roman Catholic schools like the bubonic plague.)

Anyone who believes diagramming sentences will make students better writers needs to look at history.

Presumably, then, the privileged children who attended Harvard College in the 1880s and 1890s were well acquainted with diagramming from their elementary or secondary schools. But if that familiarity did anything for their writing, the gain was not apparent to the Overseers of Harvard College’s Standing Committee on Composition. These gentlemen consistently found the writing of the students who took the required English A composition course to be dreadful. The freshmen were perceived to be in need of remediation, their writing often described as “illiterate.” And that’s Harvard.

Reed and Kellogg’s diagrams were also popular in the 1940s. In fact, they were used in two textbooks first published in that decade, both of which became instant successes and dominated their respective markets for almost the remainder of the century: Harbrace College Handbook by John C. Hodges and Warriner’s English Grammar and Composition by John E. Warriner.

It is curious that both these authors are quite temperate in their comments on diagramming. In his original (1941) edition, Hodges writes: “Diagrams are used here and there throughout the handbook to supplement the explanations. These diagrams are made as simple as possible to prevent the student from becoming more interested in complicated lines than in grammatical relationships.” In his first edition (1948), Warriner comments: “The diagrams, however, are an accessory and not an integral part of the teaching method. They may be ignored if the teacher desires.”

But back to the issue at hand: Did students in the 1950s write better than their counterparts from earlier decades? Here is the opinion of a college teacher, writing in The American Scholar in 1952:

“Generally speaking, the writing of literate Americans is pretty bad. It is muddy, backward, convoluted, and self-strangled. Almost any college professor will agree that his students’ writing stinks to high heaven. It is a rare student who can write what he has to write with simplicity, lucidity, and euphony. Far more graduating seniors are candidates for a remedial clinic than can pass a writing test with honors.”

My teaching colleagues in the same decade would have cried, “Amen.”

I myself learned how to diagram in the 1940s, taught by sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. I loved it, and my skill helped me earn two silver medals in 7th grade. Yet when I began writing seriously in high school, I rarely received a grade higher than C on the “mechanics” part of my compositions. The main reason, I was told, was that I lacked “sentence sense.” If diagramming does not promote that, what does it do?

What it does mainly is nicely illustrated by the diagram of the opening of Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address that was used as the lead for an article, “Modifying the Subject,” in the Education Life section of The New York Times. When I first saw the diagram, I wasn’t sure what it represented. The first thing that grabs one’s attention is the horizontal line:

BRIC ARCHIVE

The bones are there, but the flesh is absent. The rhetorical flourish with which Lincoln began is left to dangle beneath brought, as are the critical words forth and upon this continent.

The desecration of the final clause of the address would be even more extreme. Its horizontal line would be this:

BRIC ARCHIVE

Clearly, R&K diagrams emphasize the subject-predicate relation, and as these diagrams illustrate, that may be the least important part of a sentence. Writing is much more about focus, fit, and flow than about subjects and predicates.

Question: Apart from the fact that they could write lengthy, coherent, graceful English sentences, what did Thomas Jefferson, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Abraham Lincoln, Henry David Thoreau, Herman Melville, and Mark Twain have in common? None of them studied sentence diagramming.

Related Tags:

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Mathematics Webinar
Engaging Every Learner: Strategies to Boost Math Motivation
Math Motivation Boost! Research & real tips to engage learners.
Content provided by Prodigy Education
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Student Well-Being Webinar
The Ripple Effect: Mental Health & Student Outcomes
Learn how student mental health impacts outcomes—and how to use that data to support your school’s IEP funding strategy.
Content provided by Huddle Up
Artificial Intelligence K-12 Essentials Forum How AI Use Is Expanding in K-12 Schools
Join this free virtual event to explore how AI technology is—and is not—improving K-12 teaching and learning.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Reading & Literacy Opinion Bringing the Science of Reading to Your School? Remember This One Thing
The science of reading can’t succeed without the art of teaching.
Scott Gaynor
3 min read
Reading scores are up! School children jump for joy because they have learned to read.
Vanessa Solis/Education Week via Canva
Reading & Literacy What the Research Says Are Early-Reading Laws Changing Teaching Practices?
Laws mandating shifts in professional development and training don't always give teachers curriculum support.
6 min read
A conceptual vector image of a person pronouncing phonemes while another person observes the soundwaves under a magnifying glass.
iStock/Getty Images + Education Week
Reading & Literacy 'Science of Reading’ Advocates Underscore: It’s Not Just About Phonics
At the Reading League's annual summit in Chicago, leaders hoped to change the narrative.
7 min read
A glowing open book with a glowing light bulb against a dark blue background.
iStock/Getty
Reading & Literacy Opinion Don't Underestimate the Power of Graphic Novels for the Classroom
Not just an easy read: Comics and graphic novels can teach a host of skills, three educators explain.
11 min read
Conceptual illustration of classroom conversations and fragmented education elements coming together to form a cohesive picture of a book of classroom knowledge.
Sonia Pulido for Education Week