I learned to read by phonics. I think it’s a perfectly fine pedagogical approach, though it has its limitiations. Some words just don’t yield to “sounding it out” – I can still remember getting laughed at the first time I said the word “chauffeur” aloud. English is a weird language, with lots of oddball constructions, and you pretty much have to cover all of the exceptions to make phonics work. Not that this is a bad idea, either – you’ll come out of it with a decent vocabulary, if nothing else – but it’s by no means the most efficient way to do things.
I had never understood the “see and say” or “whole language” method until Olivia started reading her books along with me. “Reading” may be an overstatement here – she’s seen these books so many times, I’m sure she has them at least partially memorized, so I can’t say for certain that she’s not simply parroting. But while we do have some phonics-related toys for her – in particular, a set of alphabet fridge magnets that sing about what sounds each letter makes – we’ve never read to her in the “sound it out” style. For all I know, she’s simply starting to recognize words and repeat them back as she’s heard them spoken to her. Which is fine by me, and is clearly something we can build on.
So, like Kevin, I’m a little perplexed about how phonics vs. whole language has become another battle front in the cultural wars. I can understand that some people feel strongly (and will produce research that backs up their feelings) about one approach over the other. But color me agnostic on this one. I think phonics is necessary but not sufficient, and I also think that a kid who experiences a lot of words being read to her when she’s very young will adapt no matter what is ultimately taught to her. Seems to me a mix of both approaches will ultimately be best. Must we draw lines in the sand over this?
UPDATE: Of course, the reason Kevin noted this is because of a typical Bush Administration scandal:
A scorching internal review of the Bush administration’s reading program says the Education Department ignored the law and ethical standards to steer money how it wanted.
The government audit is unsparing in its review of how Reading First, a billion-dollar program each year, that it says has been beset by conflicts of interest and willful mismanagement. It suggests the department broke the law by trying to dictate which curriculum schools must use.
It also depicts a program in which review panels were stacked with people who shared the director’s views and in which only favored publishers of reading curricula could get money.
I know you’re all as shocked by this as I am. Also noted by TPM Muckraker.
Good post. One of my kids was the classic “whole language” learner and totally learned to read by context and by understanding the “big picture”. You are right in your assumption that there needs to be a whole host of strategies to meet the needs of kids with different learning styles.
By reading aloud to your daughter, you are engaging in one of the key whole language strategies–and it is working.
I am not an expert, but I did research whole language approaches for a work project and my impression was that at beginning stages, some phonics was incorporated, but as children got older, methods like word lists and spelling drills would be completely eliminated in favor of reading exercises, the theory (and experimental evidence) being that readiong comprehension and vocabulary were built by the act of reading more than anything else.
This is not meant to be figured out by comparing research of one method against another.
This is really easy. This is based on who gave the most money to Bush. Period.
All this anger, energy and illegal behavior from these opportunists would be just the same from these same people, if the backers of “Whole Language Reading” had given the most money.
There. Class dismissed.
Funny you mention that article. I was taught the ‘phonetic way’ at a Southern Baptist school I attended through the 2nd grade.
Never did the ‘whole language’ thing, but I can definitely vouch for phonetics. I think I turned out pretty good.
Having said that, my parents read aloud to me constantly when I was younger, so while I may not have received whole language instruction at school, I certainly did receive a portino of it at home.
The parents also instilled a deep passion for reading inside me early on, which probably helped out.
I’ve always been a bit mystified by the intensity of this phonics thing.
It’s sort of like the diapers and potty training silliness. For those who don’t have kids, there are endless intense heated debates on these subjects on varous parenting and baby forums. People get seriously emotionally involved. But you know, I don’t know of very many high school kids who are still wearing diapers, so one way or the other, every kid eventually figures it out.
I have 3 daughters, ages 8, 3, and 5 months. The 8 year old is reading just fine at or slightly above her 3rd grade grade level. How did she get there? Because we do a lot of reading together. She has her own way of learning that is probably a 50/50 mix of phonics and whole language just like most kids. She knows how to sound out words that she doesn’t know phonetically. But she also just learns to recognize whole words. She isn’t so much into reading on her own but is always writing stories. Lots of mis-spelled words that are spelled phonetically but incorrectly. We don’t stress about it. We can see that she is learning at an appropriate pace.
In my daughter’s class they have spelling lists every week and have had them since 1st grade. But they also do a lot of reading aloud. And her main daily homework is just to read at least 20 minutes/day. We don’t care what she reads as long as she reads. Lately she’s been reading my wife’s stash of old Calvin and Hobbs books and loves them. They are cartoons, yes, but the language and concepts are quite complex and she is learning a lot of new words and concepts.
I see absolutely no point in fretting about what technique or methods we are using. We just do what comes naturally, which is a mix of both methods
It’s fun to watch our 3 year old starting to learn words and reading. She plays lots of jump start video games which emphasize phonics. But She’s also starting to recognize words. She can, of course, read her favorite books to us verbatum as she has memorized every line. But she is also starting to absorb the meaning of certain printed words. She’s a smart kid. She’ll be reading in no time, of that I have no worries. And it won’t really matter which methods we try to use because she’ll learn her own way anyway.
This is on purpose…everything they touch….
From:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-seery/margaret-spellings-highe_b_30497.html
by John Seery
09.28.2006
Margaret Spellings’ Higher Education Report: Toward the Utter Stupidification of American Higher Education
The same folks who brought you Katrina Relief–Bush administration hacks and Republican party loyalists–now want their K-Street cronies to regulate the entire U.S. college and university system. These appointees and apparatchiks are proposing lock-step federal regulation and oversight over all colleges and universities–and tracking every single student’s lifelong educational record–in order, they say, to better help consumers.
Yeah, right.
Get this: they want to create a massive central database, a huge federal registry, that stores every single student’s educational record (with enrollment information, academic performance, along with personal financial aid information) starting from kindergarten through high school, through college, and beyond into the workplace, so that they can “track” employment outcomes. Thank you, Big Brother. You can be certain that Halliburton–or one of its subsidiaries–will get a piece of that delicious pie.
The National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities and other groups have raised obvious privacy issues, especially since the Commission at one point proposed using students’ Social Security numbers to link transcript information to the central database.
Charles Miller, the Chairman of the Spellings Commission, barked back: “I don’t know who appointed them [private colleges] guardians of privacy.” Mr. Miller, a private family investor with a bachelor’s degree in mathematics, is the Former Chairman of the Board of Regents of the University of Texas system–another under-qualified Gov. George W. Bush appointee come back to haunt us on the national scene. By the way, thank you for your reassurances about student privacy, Chuck.
So who’s doing all of this? George W. Bush’s Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings, assembled a handpicked commission, stacked it with corporate executives along with some respectable-sounding front men for various groups, and gave them the charge that the entire U.S. higher education system ought to be radically restructured along more aggressively pro-business lines. Margaret Spellings is the former Bush adviser who brought you No Child Left Behind. She’s been on the George W. Bush payroll for the last twelve years–and her connection to George is her main qualification for undertaking this enormous initiative. Maybe she’d like to practice what she now preaches and release her own past test results and complete academic record to prove her own qualifications for this particular task. With but a bachelor’s degree under her own belt, she now has the breathtaking audacity to tell every single higher education institution in America, public and private, vocational and liberal arts, that they should march to her tune. You’re doing a heckuva job, Maggie.
more