Columnist's criticism of composition courses inaccurate, wrongheaded

I was appalled by Mark Joseph Goldenson's column, Gold Standard. Mark, if you think the "UA's English Department must get back to the basics," (Friday) maybe you should go back to high school.

I would be lying if I said there weren't teachers in high school who dramatically influenced my life, but I think it's ridiculous and naive to use one good teacher from the past as a template for others in the future. No Mark, there are no Fr. Beckers teaching English 101, but each and every teacher has his or her own personality and standard for their occupation. Saying all teachers should be like the infamous Fr. Becker is just like saying all students should be like Mark Joseph Goldenson.

What struck me as appalling and thoroughly frustrated me was the basis of this ridiculous argument. You mention that we should be learning how to write instead of why. Tell me, if we don't know why we write, then what's the point? You also say that "[a] majority of freshmen students still struggle with proper grammar and punctuation ... " I am a firm believer that if you're in college, you must know something. If college students have problems with grammar and punctuation, something is not right. I think I would shoot myself if I was in English class and we were dissecting the sentence: Dick and Jane took Spot for a walk.

In response to the comments concerning peer reviews, all I can do is hang my head and sigh. Peer reviews help us to evaluate our own work by evaluating others. Some of my best paper topics have come out of other students' comments. In addition, a peer might acknowledge a lack of clarity in the paper which could be the difference between a B and A paper. I'd rather have the A, wouldn't you?

Personally, I think this article was "sour grapes" and nothing more. A bit of advice: Why don't you concentrate on your own studies - don't criticize the teachings of style until you develop your own.

By Jennifer Spinner
Arizona Daily Wildcat
March 13, 1997