By Katharhynn Heidelberg

It is true that there is no universally effective way to educate a child. However, certain trends are frightening, especially those that advocate ignoring the quality of work, so long as the child does something.

This system would not dare say, for instance, that Johnny’s wri-ting is drivel, riddled with spelling and punctuation flaws. No, the only thing that matters is that he scribbled symbols onto paper, and, by goodness, tried. Johnny’s esteem is sacrosanct, even at the expense of Johnny learning to do things right, and accepting criticism.

Whoever came up with this beautiful concept needs a solid dose of reality. Possibly, he or she could find it on a college campus, as a teacher’s aide whose thankless task it is to sift through the product of 13 years of this sort of "education." College freshmen don’t have to be budding Shakespeares, but really, they should be able to write complete, correctly spelled sentences; form arguments, and support those arguments with evidence from the text being used.

The percentage of college freshmen who are actually capable of doing this is abysmal. When (not if) they fail the courses which require basic writing skills, their self-esteem plummets. This is the same self-esteem they were brainwashed into believing would be protected, cushioned and vaunted high throughout their lifetimes. Is it possible they have been done a disservice?

Of course, it is difficult to hold students to good writing standards when society is using a lackadaisical approach to grammar and spelling. Words are repeatedly used incorrectly, or spelled in the "lazy" way so often that doing so becomes acceptable.

Particular grievances include: "Your" when "you’re" is meant; "it’s" (contracted form of it is) when "its" (possessive) is meant; an "s" with an apostrophe to indicate a plural; or a plural verb with a single subject. Example: "If a person eats poison, they will die."

A writer who once used a sentence similar to the above said, as justification: "That’s the way it’s done in all the literature I see!" She was told, just as emphatically: "It’s still wrong!" (A person is "he" or "she," not "they." One dog is an it, not they, etc.) It bears mention, too, that a person is a "who," not a "that." (Example: "The lady that wanted to buy the car came by today." If "that" must be used at all, say it thus: "That lady who wanted to buy the car came by today.")

Society is full of people who can’t be bothered to spell a word correctly, even when odds are good that they know how. ("Nite" for night, or "thru" for through, are examples). The fact that there wasn’t formerly a set spelling standard hardly excuses deliberate mistakes now.

What is perhaps the most difficult to understand in our progressively dumbed-down society is how using e-mail exempts writers from all grammar and punctuation rules.

E-mail is already one of the more convenient pieces of technology in the world — it’s not like there isn’t time to throw in a comma or a period. Too, it only requires a few extra keystrokes to use upper and lower case. All caps are not appropriate, nor is all lower-case. A certain columnist and editorial assistant is known to return e-mail generated letters and press releases which ignore this basic courtesy. (She doesn’t seem to care what Internet gurus have dictated as acceptable).