I don't think "dumbing" education is the answer at all. I am a teacher and I have the constant struggle of keeping the sanctity of education whole. I BELIEVE it is a governmental issue. For as long as I can remember as soon as test scores begin dropping considerably in one area the answer is simplify/"dumb" it down. I teach math, and the way they handled that was taking away the need for mental mathematics by handing 2nd, 3rd, and 4th graders calculators and now we have an entire generation of adults, as well as the upcoming generation, that cannot do simple addition, subtraction, and multiplication in their head. I am for teaching process and reasoning; once the student knows the reasoning for the process and its origins (why and how) they typically will remember whatever it is. But, of course, for politicians it is much easier for them to eliminate concepts . . . I am sure one of their darlings got a poor grade in Language Arts/English and that is their reasoning for a vendetta against the poor spelling rule. I do truly worry that if we keep allowing these politicians and the government as a whole to run our country that we will end up with no intellectuals at all just governmentally dependent leaches that cannot succeed because they were never allowed to be taught how to think independently and the true meaning of education.

I just thought of something else during dinner. Now that we are eliminating archaic english rules we should go ahead and get rid of the singular to plural rules as well. i.e.: goose - geese now should be gooses, man - men should be mans, mouse - mice should be mouses, woman - women should be womans, etc. I am just saying if we think that i before e is too difficult we might as well start redefining all of the english rules. LOL!

Not in England, where it's "When sounding like "ee", it's "i before e", except after c."

My first name begins EI...and is pronounced "I".
My last name includes IE...and is pronounced "E".
Go figure!

As #2 points out, any rule or guideline is better than none, particularly if it makes the student reflect on what they are doing.
As far as allowing calculators--When I was in school, we had to prove we had mastered the concepts of basic math before we were allowed to use a calculator, and then never for a test! Guess that has gone by the wayside, since people at stores would be absolutely LOST without their cash registers.

"Second: take the time to read a few really good books, poems, plays, or even ad copy, and the product of applying rules that ensure the depth and breath of our language should be obvious… if not, you have more problems than spelling."

Nobody is trying to get rid of the rules. God, people, work on your reading comprehension! What they're trying to do is teach spelling without getting students tangled up in mnemonics that have more exceptions than is really worth it.

"Third: is anyone concerned about a residual effect of the mutilation of English in text messages?"

Not really. Historically speaking, our era is a bit unusual in NOT abbreviating habitually. Until the dawn of the printed era, people shortened words all over the place in writing in order to save space and time.

It's BREADTH...not BREATH...

"Forth"????? Maybe you mean "fourth"; yeah, that's it. I hope this country doesn't get lazy and complacent by allowing text-message abbreviations in the classroom, rather than teaching PROPER English. What the heck is this world coming to!?!?!?!?

You're quoting SKL.... did you read the sentence following the little poem?

"That covers most of it, and then you have foreign-based and corrupted words that were not originally intended to sound like "ee"..."

"Rottweiler" is a German (I believe) word. So it fits perfectly with what she said.

"rottweiler" is a german word (for a breed of dog). English-language spelling rules don't apply to other languages.

That is because Rottweiler is a German word, and follows the rules of that language as far as spelling goes. A significant reason for so many exceptions to English spelling rules is that many "English" words have been borrowed from other languages. Dumbing down is a politician's way of ensuring "fairness," which is rapidly coming to mean the opposite of its original meaning. Welcome to Orwellian double-think. But then, our legal/political class have become adept manipulators of language. Lawyers learned long ago that if you control the terms of a debate, you effectively control the debate. It really all "depends on what your definition of the word 'is' is." Doesn't it?

Rotweiler is a NAME. The rule is not for NAMES. There are a lot more cases where the rule is proper and it does help young people "get it right". Ooops, that's right, now-a-days the only right way is the way that destoys existing culture.

LS,

You won your case!

DaMoKi

So I get home, open Parentdish, and discover I am being looked down upon from Mitikas by a member of hoi oligoi,… how’s the view up there Uly?

Your approach to comments herein reminds me of an English teacher I experienced in grammar school. She knew all the rules, and made sure everyone knew she was delivered on earth to deliver us from our ignorance. However, I remember she did it sans hoity-toity and somewhat esoteric verbiage like “hoi polloi”, and often without put down insults. She, like you, apparently knew the “rules of the road”, but missed the nuisances, and ultimately the point.

My reference to reading good literature to appreciate the application of English rules was an extension to the use of rules in general, which have served well to produce great works by those who learned to express themselves, even after exposure to the “i” and “e” rule. Your lack of recognition or comprehension or whatever, did not justify your “God, people” remark… maybe the air gets too thin on top of the mountain.

My question about texting was not particularly important; just a fun comment to throw in. I was humored (lol for those wallowing in ‘textville’) by your attempt to reduce it further. There have been abbreviations in the past; there will be in the future: English is dynamic and evolutionary. My admitted shallow concern was more about the effect of rapid change, not only on the existence of English form and function, but also on the utility of a non-standardized, seemingly chaotic change process. There are substantial differences between what you described, and what is happening now.

Personally, I have little concern about what the natives in England do to English, and if removal of the “i-e” rule functions to improve reasoning and expression, “Bully for them!”

Your acerbic comments are undiminished by your after-the-fact denials and attempts to shift the blame. Once again, "you" did not comprehend; this time, the important difference between facts, and feelings. There is another rule many children often hear, “It’s not what you say, it’s the way you say it.” I hope they do not stop teaching that one.

DaMoKi

Yeah, yeah, Damoki, welcome to the Net.

(Incidentally - quite apart from anything else - if you think hoi polloi is an esoteric phrase you have another think coming.)

"My question about texting was not particularly important; just a fun comment to throw in."

If you're going to try making jokes, you should make them funny.

"Your acerbic comments are undiminished by your after-the-fact denials and attempts to shift the blame."

What the hell are you talking about? I have made no denials. I have shifted no blame. I can't even *reply* to you because in several paragraphs of self-righteous whining about your feelings you've failed to say anything that directly addresses anything I've said.

Well, no. You referenced the fact that I used the Greek term hoi polloi. Everybody and their dog uses that term, probably because it rhymes. (I agree, it's silly and pretentious, but sometimes you just gotta be as pretentious as you can manage. This is why I never will say "the" hoi polloi. You lose it if you add the extra the.)