On 10/25/09, Not a Whole Language Fan as Such wrote:
> "My view,"
> You are so right. Good teachers know how to pull the
> best of many approaches. However, the newbies that are
> trained by the district with one approach, are the
> losers. That's what happened to many who had this
> "CLEVER" New Zealand woman train them in
> Whole Nonsense. Anything was acceptable as long as it
> agreed with their style. Yes, the kids had a great time
> but they simply could not read independently. It was
> all memorization of cutsy books and no substance. Three
> year olds can memorize but it doesn't mean they are
> actually reading. During that absurd time, we were told
> no children should ever be given unfamiliar material to
> read. Just when were they supposed pick up a book and
> read it?? Thank goodness those people are out of our
> district for good!! Perhaps other districts had a more
> sensible way of presenting Whole Language than mine
> did.
>
> I do not agree with the testing and regimentation of
> today. There needs a blending of both approaches with
> some common sense thrown in as well.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> I think this shows that not there is not one magic
>> bullet that is right every student. Of course, some
>> students learn best by whole language and it
>> certainly is more authentic and exciting. But some
>> students need a phonics approach. (Let's don't forget
>> we must now answer to the testing police. Testing is
>> absolutely NOT friendly toward whole language) We get
>> into trouble when we buy a curriculum and believe it
>> is the answer to all our woes. What a huge waste of
>> money for districts to purchase an adoption, buy into
>> it hook, line and sinker and insist that this is what
>> teachers must use, especially if it is a scripted
>> program like Open Court. A good teacher uses a mix of
>> theories and methods to address the needs of our
>> students.
>>
>> On 10/25/09, Not a Whole Language Fan wrote:
>>> H, "Whole language" as such has its
>>> place. However, in many districts and mine
>>> included, the cart was taken before the horse. Most
>>> children respond to a systematic approach to
>>> learning to read. Phonics would come first as a
>>> springboard to get the kids started. After that is
>>> solidly in place, then they should be weaned from
>>> phonics and concentrate on contextual clues which
>>> increase speed and understanding. Contextual clues
>>> also are very valuable for vocabulary development.
>>>
>>> The way it was taught in my district was to accept
>>> any free flowing ramblings in the writing. They
>>> were to be in "print rich" classrooms and
>>> exposed to wonderful literature. They also would
>>> paint pictures and the teachers would throw up
>>> captions about what their story was. If they were
>>> "enriched" in print, they would learn to
>>> read by osmosis. Yeah, right. If that's true, then
>>> I should be able to learn to play the piano by
>>> listening to the fine music. This was the New
>>> Zealand approach complete with the Wright Group
>>> (Wrong Group) materials.
>>>
>>> That being said, M, please explain the way whole
>>> language should be presented. You seem to be in the
>>> know and that's great. You just didn't mention
>>> specifically how it should be done.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Renee- simple! It wouldn't get done! Now I do
>>>> work extra because I want to teach well, but if
>>>> EVERY teacher committed to doing this (not
>>>> working extra) to make a point I would
>>>> participate. I think it would send a strong
>>>> message. I know if I did this this weekend I
>>>> wouldn't have any lesson plans for next week!
>>>>
>>>> And a side note about Whole Language- no, Renee
>>>> didn't post this, but I saw it on another
>>>> comment. Whole Language is good. Many people have
>>>> no clue what real Whole Language practice is.
>>>> Actually, most do not. Principals, districts,
>>>> etc. took it and created their own version- as
>>>> what almost always happens. Readers and Writers
>>>> Workshop is alive and well in many classrooms,
>>>> and children are thriving on it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/17/09, Renee G wrote:
>>>>> On 10/16/09, yep wrote:
>>>>>> Boy did you hit the nail on the head. Of
>>>>>> course, the state is going to say that
>>>>>> "funding on a shoestring" is
>>>>>> working-only because TEACHERS ALWAYS make
>>>>>> things work. We're working our behinds
>>>>>> off-but no one sees or admits that.
>>>>>> Conditions are abysmal, class sizes are too
>>>>>> big, and we don't have enough or any prep
>>>>>> time-yet we make it work. It's imperative
>>>>>> that this time we don't make it work, that we
>>>>>> "complain" loudly and clearly, and
>>>>>> make sure parents and students feel the
>>>>>> difference. Otherwise, we're stuck-even when
>>>>>> money comes back to California
>>>>>
>>>>> What would happen if......
>>>>>
>>>>> .... teachers worked ONLY their assigned hours
>>>>> (and not at home)
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> ..... teachers did not spend their own money...
>>>>> not a dime.... on their classrooms?
>>>>>

Share This Post | Report This Post

Next Post >>

Posts on this thread, including this one