CB> Perhaps it is the wide age range I have taught. I still have
CB> troubles with the way WL is being taught here, many of us
CB> recognize that it is being blamed for something that is
CB> really out of the control of teachers -poor training and poor
CB> support economically.
I'm not sure that you can excuse WL results with "poor training 
and poor support economically." I think this is an assumption 
that needs to be explored/documented. I can supply some 
anecdotal information.
My wife is a first grade teacher at a "Roots and Wings" school. 
It is one the national demonstration schools funded by NASDAC. 
The "Roots" program is a copy of Slavin's Success for All 
program. It incorporates elements of a phonics program (poorly) 
with a WL approach. Our supervisors are whole language converts.
The school is completed the reading program pilot last year, 
therefore the teachers are allowed to modify the program to fit 
their needs. The math program is being piloted by some teachers 
(not my wife) and the program is being taught "by the book" after 
training. There is a coordinator to help implement the program 
and secure materials, etc.
My wife is NOT a WL fan by any stretch of the imagination. She 
has incorporated elements of what the county calls WL into her 
bag of trick, but is a taskmaster who pounds skills into little 
heads. She is typically given the kids with the lowest placement 
in reading. Her tone is firm and kind and her voice is always 
level. Her classroom houses an outdated IBM lab (our cost, my job 
to keep it going), a small stage with canopy, a reading bench, 
exercise cycle, hamsters, fish, chickens (at times), frogs, 
salamanders, etc. Parents fight to get their kids into her 
class.  The fridge is plastered with the "I love you" notes.
Two days ago my wife came home and said that the new county 
supervisor (BTW, one fallout of always being on the edge of 
reform is that supervisors appear and disappear with great speed) 
wandered into her classroom. The super stayed for an hour. 
Now they want to video my wife and make demonstration 
tapes to show others how it should be done. The request will 
be politely declined. They are trying to make sense of the results 
of the school data. 
Other teachers who support WL are doing the program to a "T". 
One, also a first grade teacher who has the higher reading group, 
does the reading program by the book. Her kids informed my 
wife's class that they were "reading" after the first day of 
school and showed a folded paper book from which they read. They 
are flying through the reading series and the kids with 
experience (from home) as well as those with talent and doing 
pretty well. Others, however, and starting to run into trouble. 
These kids can't sound out unfamiliar words. They all depend to a 
large degree on memorizing sight words. By the end of the year, 
my wife's group will be reading on at least the same level, if 
not higher than the other group (some kids who have the talent, 
but no experience soar in her reading group). However, the 
difference becomes more apparent when the kids have to actually 
read for meaning. The other classes are often "prepared" for the 
reading test- somehow the words used often become spelling words.
When faced with unfamiliar word they cannot easily decode them.
My long winded point is that teaching is not only an art, but 
that often we don't see the whole picture. Perhaps WL fails 
because people do exactly what they are trained/told to do with 
the materials provided.
Climbing down off the soap box..... Glad the wind is diminishing 
on the Bay, I'll get busy on the water and stop my blast of hot 
air in here 
 * RM 1.31 3319 * 
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0GI
---------------