CHARLES BEAMS spoke of Whole Language 1      1/ to DAN TRIPLETT on 09-01-
96
CB>Responding to a message by Dan, to Charles on ...
CB> 
CB>DT>Action Reading is a program that one can purchase for use in the
CB>DT>home.   It is marketed on TV's ubiquitous commercials.  They are a
CB>DT>phonics based  program and they are in the business of selling a
CB>DT>product (which they  believe in) and making some money.  I would
CB>DT>hardly consider them a  reliable source for information regarding
CB>DT>Whole Language. 
CB>I've not seen their ads.  Perhaps this is a regional program?
Don't know....I should have said info commercials..
CB>DT>The American Federation of Teacher, which is on record of opposing
CB>DT>WL,  is a smaller? teacher's union.  I don't believe that the NEA
CB>DT>holds to  the same positions regarding WL.  Why would one be so
CB>DT>impressed with  what they have to say (The AFT)?
CB> 
CB>This is a topic which I could spout off on for hours.  I use a lot of
CB>AFT information because I am a member and a local president within
CB>that  organization.  But you are right - they are a smaller
CB>organization than  the NEA, only about 600,000 members.  Does that
CB>disqualify them?  
No....wish I knew you were a president of a local union before I put my 
foot in my mouth.  I hate that when that happens..
CB>The NEA has just this year changed its focus and opened its own
CB>research  center for education, so they are a bit behind but should
CB>be up to speed  very soon.  I'm not sure if you are aware of it, but
CB>the AFT and the NEA  have been holding serious merger talks -
CB>wouldn't be a surprise if the  merger occured within a year or two.
CB>But that's beside the point. 
Beside the point but an interesting aside...
 
CB>If you're unaware or unimpressed with the prestige of the research 
CB>branch of the AFT, nothing I can say will change your mind.
I admit I wasn't aware of any research branch....
CB> 
CB>DT>Marvel away....you need to get away from the idea that WL is a
CB>DT>process.   It is not and never has been.
CB> 
CB>Semantics.  Any group of lessons taught utilizing the "philosophy" 
CB>automatically assigns a process to it.
Ok.....but it is not a process in the way you suggest.  It is more a 
philosophy that one processes from.  And since it is a philosophy there 
is no way of perfectly "canning" a program to follow any process.
CB> 
CB>DT>You must have more faith in the opinions of a relatively obscure 
CB>DT>teacher's union than you do in what whole-language theorists have
CB>DT>to say  on the matter.  What makes their claims more credible then
CB>DT>the WL  theorists themselves?  
CB> 
CB>Cheap shot at the AFT, which I'll ignore. 
There goes my foot again..
CB>* UniQWK #5290* Do people rap on your head and say "Hello? Anybody
CB>home?"  
Hey....is this quote here because of what I said about the AFT?  And it 
was a pot-shot not a cheap shot.  (what is a pot-shot enywai?  opps darn 
phonics!)
CMPQwk 1.42 445p
POLITICS: Poly: many + Tics: blood sucking parasites
* ++++++  *
     _   /|    ACK!
     \'o.O'   /
     =(__)+
       U
 
--- GEcho 1.11+
---------------