[NLA] reading instruction and policy advocacy

[Art LaChance]

Eileen,
I agree with several of your points here but I have discussion on one or two.

If the student has no ability to "sound-out" unfamiliar words the "reading"
capability is limited to memorization of words, and certainly no meaning will be
transferred from those unfamiliar words.  But it seems to me that as a child
grows and they experience more and more verbal language from the environment
they become associated with larger vocabularies so that when they reach the
point of being able to sound out the unfamiliar they can make a connection as to
meaning.

I have great reservations as to allowing "local systems" to develop what they
think "works".  I believe that's why we have the problem we have now in local
education.  Additionally, my understanding of the phonics issue is that when the
local system (read as GA) began using whole language exclusively the colleges
and universities stopped teaching teachers how to teach using phonics, so now
there is a large group of "certified" teachers and administrators who know very
little about phonics.  I don't say that lightly either.  I know this to be
absolutely factual for this rural community in particular and adjacent
communities are quite similar.

I believe the case for phonics vs whole language has been made, and quite
clearly.  The question is: has academia and administration listened ?  Those of
us in the adult literacy classrooms see the results of both daily and realize
fully that both are required, not recommended, and again - that's 'required', in
order for any person to become fluent readers of the language.  If they can
read, like your daughter, they picked the capability up from somewhere, it does
not happen automatically.  If it was an automatic function, we wouldn't have to
deal with the monster we have now.

Another reading issue is 'how' does the student read?  One word at a time ?
Complete sentences ?  One of the primary problems stemming from 'word lists' is
that some students never move beyond reading 'lists'.  They may read
horizontally, but in effect all they're doing is reading a word list, albeit
quickly in some cases.  "Context" doesn't happen unless the student is taught to
read in complete thoughts.  They may remember some of the primary issues but to
'understand' what they read more completely they must be taught to read for
comprehension.  That is a separate issue from phonics and whole language.  Some
arguments may support the idea that this IS whole language, but my experience is
that it's not being addressed by the teaching staff so I can't believe that it's
being taught to teachers.

art




Eileen Eckert wrote:

> Thanks, Tom Zurinskas, for your NRP summary. I'm responding to your
> statement, "I hope the NLA rallies behind the National Reading Panel."
> Relating this discussion to policy issues, what does it mean to rally behind
> the NRP? Is that like saying, "Please mandate that everyone do what I think
> is right, even if they're not convinced by my arguments, even if what
> they're already doing works"?
>
> Tom, you haven't convinced me that your blanket statement, phonics is best,
> is true. Rather than rallying behind the NRP, I think we should be
> advocating for local control of methodological decisions. Accountability can
> come from answering the question: How do you know that what you are doing
> works? rather than from answering the question: How did you comply with the
> requirement to teach phonemic awareness?
>
> By the way, I'm not against teaching phonemic awareness. I believe it is
> <part> of learning to read for most people. However, also consider these two
> anecdotes.
>
> First, my seven-year-old daughter's only schooling in reading (or any other
> subject) has been in Spanish. She has had some informal phonemic instruction
> in English from me, but nothing systematic. She reads well above "grade
> level" in Spanish <and> English (in fact, she reads somewhat better in
> English, and she does not sound out words using the Spanish phonemes). She
> is being raised in a very "print rich" bilingual environment. Whatever you
> say about the lack of methodologically rigorous research, you cannot
> convince me the evidence of my eyes and ears is wrong. Instilling a love of
> reading helps people become better readers.
>
> Second, consider the following exchange between my niece and nephew. Luke:
> What are those books you're talking about? Would I like them?
> Shannon: You wouldn't like them, they have too many big words.
> Luke: I can read big words, I just don't understand them.
>
> My point: The case for phonics vs. whole language (or for the proper
> balance) has not yet been made conclusively. Policymakers should leave the
> decision about reading instruction to local programs, and support further
> development of local-level expertise to evaluate the research and make the
> best judgment about how to teach.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> NLA mailing list: NLA at lists.literacytent.org
> http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/nla
> LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
> http://literacytent.org

_______________________________________________
NLA mailing list: NLA at lists.literacytent.org
http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/nla
LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
http://literacytent.org