The point of phonics is to get kids reading
independently. As one poster mentioned, it's a
springboard to get them started. Phonics is a first step,
not a total program in itself. If it is used that way, it
defeats its purpose. When kids have the sound/symbol
relationship down, then they need to concentrate on
reading the whole sentences and learn the concept of
contextual clues. It moves them into understanding and
comprehension. It isn't a case of either or; it's both.
However, many school systems have taken each method as an
end in itself and botched it. To throw whole language at
them without any base is inviting disaster and that's
exactly what happened. On the other hand, grinding away
all day on phonics is ridiculous. I don't know many
teachers who do that. The Whole Language purists claim
this happens and they really don't know what they're
talking about.

Further, it's about the order in which concepts are
taught. Taking the cart before the horse invites
disaster.

> Your response on whole language is very interesting. I
> agree, for the most
> part, however young children do need to experience
> reading and not just do phonics and grammar worksheets.
> That being said I found it very interesting when I took
> the GLAD training that every educational
> "theory" that has been on the market - and I
> do mean "market" as selling programs for
> profit- is now part of GLAD(another money making
> program in my opinion). What the heck are we doing in
> education?
>
> worksheetsOn 10/29/09, anon wrote:
>> Marie Clay, along with Fountas and Pinnell, should be
>> tried for educational malpractice. Their ideas are
>> absolute garbage.
>>
>> "Whole language" and the delusional
>> theories of Ken Goodman have a lot to do with why
>> there is a furious backlash against public education
>> today and why schools are in a horrible mess with
>> standardized tests, state standards, and the
>> deskilling of teachers overall. Goodman's nutball
>> theories basically forced high school-style language
>> arts on young children, who NEED the foundation of
>> phonics, grammar, spelling, and all of the rest to be
>> able to truly READ.
>>
>> It was and is completely inappropriate.
>>
>>
>>
>> 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