I think this is a critically important topic, and I appreciate Honestly addressing it.
The interview seemed a bit peculiar to me. It began by addressing what I believe is the crux of the issue: radical and unwise reading instruction using the whole language approach. The interviewee seemed to be focused on the immediate problem, and I was…
I think this is a critically important topic, and I appreciate Honestly addressing it.
The interview seemed a bit peculiar to me. It began by addressing what I believe is the crux of the issue: radical and unwise reading instruction using the whole language approach. The interviewee seemed to be focused on the immediate problem, and I was initially enthusiastic about the direction the discussion was taking.
But then, past the mid-point, when the topic changed to "what do we do to fix this," suddenly we were talking about equity and family incomes and everything *except* the basic methodology of reading instruction. The word "phonics" did not occur once. It was as if two separate interviews were knitted together, the first correctly identifying the fundamental problem in reading instruction, and the second continuing as if we really had no idea what was wrong with reading instruction.
I'm not a professional educator, just a parent who homeschooled six children, three of them all the way through high school. My children can all read, and not one of them was ever exposed to this "whole language" approach to teaching.
"Sound it out." That's a simple instruction that children can easily comprehend and execute. As Ms. Hanford observed, kids know the words -- they just don't know how to read them. Phonetic discovery is an obvious way to lead kids into recognizing words without frankly ridiculous games of guessing based on pictures and context.
I think this is a critically important topic, and I appreciate Honestly addressing it.
The interview seemed a bit peculiar to me. It began by addressing what I believe is the crux of the issue: radical and unwise reading instruction using the whole language approach. The interviewee seemed to be focused on the immediate problem, and I was initially enthusiastic about the direction the discussion was taking.
But then, past the mid-point, when the topic changed to "what do we do to fix this," suddenly we were talking about equity and family incomes and everything *except* the basic methodology of reading instruction. The word "phonics" did not occur once. It was as if two separate interviews were knitted together, the first correctly identifying the fundamental problem in reading instruction, and the second continuing as if we really had no idea what was wrong with reading instruction.
I'm not a professional educator, just a parent who homeschooled six children, three of them all the way through high school. My children can all read, and not one of them was ever exposed to this "whole language" approach to teaching.
"Sound it out." That's a simple instruction that children can easily comprehend and execute. As Ms. Hanford observed, kids know the words -- they just don't know how to read them. Phonetic discovery is an obvious way to lead kids into recognizing words without frankly ridiculous games of guessing based on pictures and context.
Sound it out.