In what has been described as a “stunning breakthrough” in education policy and practice, Hillsdale College has announced its Science of Walking curriculum guide. Based on the burgeoning popularity of the Science of Reading campaign, Science of Walking
This is wonderfully done - and sounds just like the meetings at the TN State Board of Ed or just about any legislative education committee. Hilarious - except, well, darkly so.
Just dropping in to say that I’m shocked that you’re advocating whole language above phonics. I’ve read McWhorter’s case for phonics and am fully persuaded. Could you point me to a convincing argument for whole language? I can’t think of one.
Read Frank Smith or Noam Chomsky. Of course, reading isn't either/or. Language is both the symbols that represent ideas and the ideas themselves. I don't dismiss phonics at all. It is the singleminded focus on phonics that misses much of the richness of reading and reading instruction. Most kids don't need explicit phonics instruction. Many do. A good teacher knows precisely what a student needs (or doesn't). Say hi to your parents!
The argument that I'm familiar with is that reading aloud to children when they are pre-literate gives them a huge advantage, and that those children don't need phonics instruction. But children with less literate parents don't do this, so they require phonics instruction. So, the emphasis on whole language in underprivileged schools was a catastrophe.
Some truth, but incomplete. The advantage is conferred by social context with lots of spoken language. Many poor children have such an environment, many do not. I don't resist the importance of phonics as part of learning. The idea that whole language was a dogmatic approach that excluded phonics is a red herring. All of this dodges the real issue in poor neighborhoods. Huge classes, little or no set of family resources. Hungry children. Phonics won't fix any of that.
This is wonderfully done - and sounds just like the meetings at the TN State Board of Ed or just about any legislative education committee. Hilarious - except, well, darkly so.
Just dropping in to say that I’m shocked that you’re advocating whole language above phonics. I’ve read McWhorter’s case for phonics and am fully persuaded. Could you point me to a convincing argument for whole language? I can’t think of one.
Read Frank Smith or Noam Chomsky. Of course, reading isn't either/or. Language is both the symbols that represent ideas and the ideas themselves. I don't dismiss phonics at all. It is the singleminded focus on phonics that misses much of the richness of reading and reading instruction. Most kids don't need explicit phonics instruction. Many do. A good teacher knows precisely what a student needs (or doesn't). Say hi to your parents!
The argument that I'm familiar with is that reading aloud to children when they are pre-literate gives them a huge advantage, and that those children don't need phonics instruction. But children with less literate parents don't do this, so they require phonics instruction. So, the emphasis on whole language in underprivileged schools was a catastrophe.
Some truth, but incomplete. The advantage is conferred by social context with lots of spoken language. Many poor children have such an environment, many do not. I don't resist the importance of phonics as part of learning. The idea that whole language was a dogmatic approach that excluded phonics is a red herring. All of this dodges the real issue in poor neighborhoods. Huge classes, little or no set of family resources. Hungry children. Phonics won't fix any of that.
Thank you. I will look into this!