SHEILA KING spoke of Whole Language 2      1/3 to DAN TRIPLETT on 09-08-
96
SK>-> Like children who are engaged with language and learn to speak as
SK>-> a result, children engaged with words can learn spelling
SK>-> conventions more naturally.  I am not speaking of osmosis but a
SK>-> deliberate process of teaching spelling that is both meaningful
SK>-> and natural to the child.
SK> 
SK>I think, like the article I cross-posted from k12.chat.teacher
SK>yesterday, that this is true for a great many students. Students who
SK>already have internalized some of the phonetic rules of our language
SK>would probably benefit to some extent from "inventive spelling". But
SK>students who are still puzzled by the rules, who still are having
SK>difficulty reading (possibly these are LD students?) would not get
SK>far with inventive spelling? What do you think?
I heard that for LD students more phonics is better.  I think that was 
mentioned here by someone.  I really haven't read anything about this.  
However I can only assume that children who engage in writing will spell 
using the phonetic knowledge they possess at the time.  I would think 
that LD students can do this as well but I would have to defer to one 
more experienced in this area.
 
SK> 
SK>-> Correct spelling, says Hillerich, should not be an academic topic
SK>-> but belongs in the class of etiquette.
SK> 
SK>That statement is a bit extreme for my taste. I think it is another
SK>one of those "standards" that we let sink ever lower with each
SK>succeeding generation. I think it still belongs as an academic
SK>subject. 
I like what he says here...  I would think that teaching spelling in the 
context of writing is appropriate. 
When I do free writing I do not worry about my spelling.  However when I 
publish something that someone else would read I check my spelling.  If 
I run into a word I am uncertain of the spelling I sometime look it up 
as I write but usually I just write knowing that when I edit (using my 
trusty spell checker) I will catch errors.  I am sure you have noticed 
that some of my posts had errors here and there.  Some words were 
mistyped (like hole instead of hold) and it passed spell check.  I do 
try to "edit" and correct grammatical errors.....keeping a keen eye out 
for that misplaced modifier.  I think this logically can fall into the 
area of etiquette.  One of the arguments against making spelling an 
academic subject is that it becomes isolated and separate from the 
writing process.  It needs to be taught in conjunction with writing.
SK>-> He goes on to describe word lists and how to use them.  It's an
SK>-> interesting book and I don't think he is coming from a
SK>-> whole-language perspective.  He has word lists, pretest and test,
SK>-> word studies, recording of spelling progress.  I would think that
SK>-> these are ideas we would all agree on.
SK> 
SK>Yes, I'm surprised that you mention such an approach. It sounds very
SK>traditional to me?
Actually it is but not all traditional ideas are discarded by WL 
proponents.  At least not this one.  I am in favor of what is best for 
kids and I am trying to figure out just what that is.  I believe I am on 
the right track with WL.
Dan
CMPQwk 1.42 445p
Windows isn't CrippleWare -- it's "Functionally Challenged".
* ++++++  *
     _   /|    ACK!
     \'o.O'   /
     =(__)+
       U
 
--- GEcho 1.11+
---------------